Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/12/04	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: 071026     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documents provided by the applicant. 

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: 040527
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 040611   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: HHSC, 15th MI Bn., 504th MI Bde (Rear)(Prov), Ft. Hood, TX  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040423, wrongful use of marijuana (040222-040322), reduction to E4, forfeiture of $945 x2, 45 days of extra duty (FG)

040518, wrongful use of marijuana (040329-040429), reduction to E1, 27 days extra duty (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  24
Current ENL Date: 020131    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 4Mos, 11Days ?????
Total Service:  		9 Yrs, 7Mos, 14Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG 941028-950605/NA
                                       ADT 950606-951024/UNC
                                       ARNG 951025-001027/HD
                                       USACG 001028-010530/NA
                                       USAR 010531-020130/HD
Highest Grade: E5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68W10 Health Care Specialist   GT: 107   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: GWOTSM, NDSM (2nd Awd), ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Tuscaloosa, AL
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant provided several letters of recommendation and/or commendation from the USPS.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 27 May 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense for testing positive for marijuana (THC), a Schedule I controlled substance on          22 March 2004 and on 29 April 2004, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  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 applicant voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an adminstrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service or description of separation no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waived further rehabilitative efforts.  On 2 June 2004, 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 applicant has a Military police report dated 15 April 2004, in his Official Military Personnel file.
       
       On 26 October 2007, the Army Discharge Review Board reviewed the applicant's case per his request of 060921. The ADRB determined that relief was warranted and granted relief in the form of an upgrade of the charaterization of service to fully Honorable.  The board determined that the reason for the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.
       

       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 a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the narrative reason for discharge on the applicant's DD Form 214.  
       
       The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct with a general, under honorable conditions.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct” and the separation code is "JKK."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  
       
       The analyst noted that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service. 
       
        The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation, which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in the civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings.  The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge.  
       
       The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 
       
       Finally, 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 separation and reentry codes were proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.   

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 2010/04/22         Location: Atlanta GA

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

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 NA    No change NA
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
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090021375
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages