Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2009/08/17 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he would like to be able to avail himself for employment opportunities and would like for the board to considered the length and quality of his service.
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: 051013
Discharge Received: Date: 051110 Chapter: 14-12c(2) AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct-Abuse of Illegal Drugs RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: A Company, 92nd Engineer Combat Battalion (H), 36th Engineer Combat Group (MEB), Camp Liberty, Iraq
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051013, Summary Court-Martial-for wrongfully distributing two pills of Flexural, without a prescription or authorization to SPC on or about 050530. He was sentenced to reduction to Private (E-1) and 15 days hard labor without confinement.
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 17
Current ENL Date: 030312 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 7 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Total Service: 2 Yrs, 7 Mos, 29 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 21W10 Carpentry/Masonry Spec GT: 93 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (050130-051102)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWTSM, ASR
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence of record shows that on 13 October 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he wrongfully distributed Flexori and Valium, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, entered into a pretrial trial agreement (offer to plead guilty) to unconditionally waive his right to an administrative separation board including a board authorized to recommend a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.
The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 16 October 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
b. Legal Basis for Separation:
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 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, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review, the issue and document submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.
The analyst determined that the applicants discharge was appropriate because the quality of his 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 his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
The analyst noted the applicant's issues in reference to him wanting to go forward with his career and that his military background shows honor and respect in his character. The analyst considered the applicants quality of service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge. Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that 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: 22 June 2010 Location: Chicago, IL
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: NA
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted a copy of his Pretrial Agreement (Offer to Plead Guilty) in reference to a Summary Court-Martial that was pending dated 21 September 2005.
VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts 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: No Change
RE Code:
Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change
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 AR20090014015
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080007485
Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on on 8 March 2007, the applicant in consultation with defense counsel and being fully advised, offered in a pretrial agreement (offer to plead guilty) to accept an other than honorable conditions discharge in the action initiated to separate him and to waive his rights to an administrative separation board. On 16 May 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080016071
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 30 November 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconductpattern of misconduct for a positive marijuana test (051013), and wrongfully wearing the Ranger Tab on his uniform, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070006169C071116
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board per his offer to plead guilty (pretrial agreement), dated 9 January 2004, and did not submitted a statement in his own behalf. On 6 February 2004, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070006169C071116
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board per his offer to plead guilty (pretrial agreement), dated 9 January 2004, and did not submitted a statement in his own behalf. On 6 February 2004, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100014022
On 20 June 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. The analyst determined that the applicants 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 applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012474
Applicant Name: ????? c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants military records, and the issue [and documents] submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100007512
Applicant Name: ????? 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 intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended that the applicant be retained on active duty, and if he is separated, recommended that his service be characterized as honorable.
ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110010495
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 6 September 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct; in that he disobeyed a lawful order from a SGT x 3 (050523), (050524), (050225), failed to be at his appointed place of duty (050517), made a false official statement to a SGT (050517) and AWOL (050615-050616), with a general,...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080012819
Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080017489
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 12 March 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct for receiving an Article 15 for violation of Articles 90 and 112, numerous counselings for failure to report, drinking on duty, disobeying his unit commander, disrespecting a NCO, dereliction of duty by allowing an unlicensed...