Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2010/11/12 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA
I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: The applicant states that "My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 60 months of service with no other adverse action and no option for a drug rehabilitation program."
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: 100330
Discharge Received: Date: 100429 Chapter: 14-12c (2) AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: Charlie Company, 224th Military Intelligence Battalion (Aerial Exploitation), Hunter Army Airfield, GA
Time Lost: None
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 24
Current ENL Date: Reenl/070508 Current ENL Term: 5 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 11 Mos, 23 Days ?????
Total Service: 5 Yrs, 1 Mos, 27 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 050303-070507/HD
Highest Grade: E-5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 35N20 Signal Intel Analyst GT: 100 EDU: GED Cert Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (080906-090406)
Decorations/Awards: GCMDL, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICMDLw/CS, ASR, MUC
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 29 March 2010, 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 tested positive for marijuana on (100216), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. On 30 March 2010, 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 7 April 2010, 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 record contains a Military Police Report in reference to the applicant's offense of wrongfully using marijuana dated 17 March 2010.
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 applicants military records, 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 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. By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his 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 applicants service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.
The analyst noted the applicant's issue that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 60 months of service with no other adverse action. Even though the applicant claims it was a single incident, the analyst concluded that 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. Having examined all the circumstances, the analyst 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 below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
The applicant further contends that was not given an option for a drug rehabilitation program. However, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was referred to the Army's Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) on 16 March 2010.
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: 13 July 2011 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: None
Witnesses/Observers: NA
Exhibits Submitted: Online application dated 12 November 2010.
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 AR20100026900
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 3 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100030134
The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100008818
The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110022964
Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconductfor abuse of illegal drugs, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 18 March 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. ...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100028909
Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 24 months of service with no other adverse action. On 24 August 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 analyst determined that the applicants discharge was appropriate because the quality of his...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100025042
Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100014756
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. 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090016380
Applicant Name: ????? On 22 August 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in her own behalf. 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.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008258
Applicant Name: ????? On 11 July 2008, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100022580
Many Soldiers in the unit that he was in were offered rehabilitation, and he was not. On 16 September 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090010488
Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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...