Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/03/29	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states"I wanted to join college but when i tried during the army, we were already getting ready to leave for Iraq. Now that i am out i wanted to finish my dream and head to college for a business major, so i can also start my own business in the future. All i need is the G.I. Bill and i can start my dream without no hassle through the army!"

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: 090713
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090731   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Troop, 2nd Squadron, 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, Fort Hood, TX 

Time Lost: AWOL x 1 for 36 days from (070909-071014). The applicant returned to his unit. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 071101, wrongfully used marijuana between on or about (070721-070820), AWOL from (070909-071015), without authority, left his appointed place of duty on or about (071024), forfeiture of $650.00 pay per month for two months, extra duty for 45 days, restriction for 6 days (FG)

Article 15, 090505, wrongfully used cocaine between on or about (090308-090406), forfeiture of $699.00 pay per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG)

Article 15, 070827, failed to obey a lawful order issued by a CPT, his superior commissioned officer on or about (070720), failed to go to his appointed place of duty x 5 on or about (070720), (070612), (070611), (070610), (070606), disobeyed a lawful command from a LTC, his superior commissioned officer on or about (070617), without authority, left his appointed place of duty on or about (070608), reduced to to private (E-1), forfeiture of $303.00 pay per month for one month, extra duty and restriction for 14 days, and an oral reprimand (CG)

Article 15, 081023, through negligence, discharged a M4 service rifle at the upload/clearing area located at or near the front gate of FOB Warhorse on or about (080815), forfeiture of $314.00 pay, extra duty for 14 days and an oral reprimand (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: 061114    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  21 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 7 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 7 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92Y10 Unit Supply Spec   GT: 90   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (071025-090104)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWTSM, ICMDLw/CS, ASR, OSR

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 July 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense; in that he wrongfully used marijuana and cocaine, 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 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  On 20 July 2009, 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 submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       The analyst determined that the applicant’s 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. 
       
       Additionally, the analyst noted that the DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document-Drug Testing) found in the applicant's official record shows that the test was coded CO which indicates "Competence for Duty/Command Direct/Fitness for duty.”  The commander directs an individual test for fitness for duty.  The commander has a suspicion that a Soldier is using a controlled substance, however, does not have probable cause.  The Limited Use Policy applies to this test basis, per AR 600-85.  However, the evidence of record contains a developmental counseling form that indicate the unit conducted a 10 percent urinalisis on 6 April 2009, in which the applicant's results returned positive for a controlled substance (i.e., cocaine). 
       
       Additionally, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, who would have informed him if the Limited Use Policy applied.  In view of the aforementioned, the analyst determined that the code on the DD Form 2624 was in all likelihood incorrect and should have been coded IR for “Inspection Random” used for normal monthly random testing (i.e., 10% unit testing) instead of CO for “Competence for Duty.”  The analyst concluded that the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error on file in this case.  The evidence did not create a substantial doubt that the discharge would have been any different if the error had not been made.
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he is out of the Army now and he wants to finish his dream and head to college to beome a business major, so that he can start his own business in the future.  All he need is the G.I. Bill.  Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 
       
       Therefore, 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: 15 December 2010         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application dated 23 March 2010.  

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review 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: 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 AR20100011913
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages