Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/07/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states in effect that he was young and immature, was having family problems and would like a second chance for a career in the military.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 060131
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060317   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: HHC, 2/82nd Aviation Rgt, Ft Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050817, failed to go at the prescribed time to his designated place of duty (060724); reduction to E2, forfeiture of $323 pay per month for one month, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 060217, 14 days extra duty and restriction (CG). 

051219, vacation of suspension for intent to deceive made a false official statement (051207); reduction to E2 and forfeiture of $323 pay per month for one month (CG). 

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 040915    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  24 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 06Mos, 03Days ?????
Total Service:  		1 Yrs, 06Mos, 03Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92F10 Petroleum Supply Spc   GT: 94   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Lumberton, NC
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states that he is a corrections officer and has worked as a shift leader at Smith Fields Corporation.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 31 January 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12(c), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense for wrongful use of marijuana (051109-051209),with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       On 22 February 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       On 24 February 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 of this regulation establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.   

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable.  
       The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier.  The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies.  By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  
       The applicant contends he was young and immature; however, the analyst noted that he met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue related to his family problems and determined that he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.
       Finally, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 
       Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 26 July 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: Ms. Tia Emanuel (wife) 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 214, Character reference letter (1 page), separation paperwork (15 pages), Request Pertaining to Military Records (1 page) and Lab One oral fluid drug test (1 page).  On the applicant's self-authored statement he mentions three character reference letters; however, they are not attached to his application.




VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst's recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA






Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090012688
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages