Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/05/25	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "I request that he discharge characterization received be amended to Honorable/Under General Conditions or minimally to General/Under Honorable Conditions".

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: 940110
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 970214   Chapter: 14, Sec II       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKB   Unit/Location: C Battery, 3/7th FA, Schofield Barracks, HI 

Time Lost: AWOL 329 days (940802-950627) apprehended

Civilian confinement (950627-970213), the applicant was arrested in Oklahoma City, OK, charged with trafficking and incarcerated for 1000 days.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  26
Current ENL Date: 960910    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 05Mos, 04Days ?????
Total Service:  		5 Yrs, 08Mos, 21Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG 870604-870910/UNC
                                       ARNG 870911-881027/UNK
                                       ARNG 881027-920409/UNK
                                       ARNG 920410-930809/UNK
                                       RA 930910-960909/HD (immediate reenlistment)
Highest Grade: E5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10 Cannon Crewmember   GT: 110   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany, Hawaii   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM x2, AGCM 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Mustang, OK
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 13 September 1996, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, Section II, AR 635-200, by reason of a conviction by a civilian court on (950627) for trafficking illegal drugs, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 17 December 1996, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board 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 action and recommended approval of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 29 January 1997, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 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, and the issue and documents 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 service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of the former Soldier’s service below that meriting a fully honorable 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.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       The analyst acknowledges the applicant's in service accomplishments as stated in his application.  However, the analyst did not find the said issue sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       The applicant does not provide an issue of equity or propriety.
       
       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: 16 February 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant provided his OMPF for review.

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: 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 AR20100015652
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages