Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/01/14	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he worked hard to be the best he could be.  He was on the SRT for Fort Jackson as the armor and shield man in the stack.  Due to one incident of misconduct during his 2.5 years of service, he was discharged.  Since he has been out of the service, he has been serving those serving our country working with the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

He feels that he has earned an honorable discharge and is well aware that he has screwed up and does regret his actions.  All he ever wanted growing up was to be in the Army.  He is asking the Review Board to take into consideration his request to change his characterization of service to honorable.  There is nothing to gain from the change other than his personal feelings that he did not fail.  

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: 040614/The unit commander recommended reclassification in another MOS.
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 041223   Chapter: 13       AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory performance	   RE:     SPD: JHJ   Unit/Location: 17th Military Police Detachment, Fort Jackson, SC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040524, wrongfully used marijuana between (040401-040511), reduction to Private (E-2), forfeiture of $312.00 pay, extra duty and restriction for 14 days (CG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 020607    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 6 Mos, 17 Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 6 Mos, 17 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31B10 Military Police   GT: 120   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states in his issue that he works with the Department of Veterans Affairs by serving those who serve our country. 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 14 June 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct for events that had taken place both on and off duty in reference to his use of a controlled substance, and that his ability to perform his duties effectively in the future, to include potential for advancement or leadership, was unlikely.  The unit commander recommended that the applicant be reclassified for duties in another MOS.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 14 June 2004, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and that he was being separated for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200.  The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  On 14 June 2004, the unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army prior to the expiration of his term of service and that further rehabilitative efforts be waived.  
       
       On 14 June 2004, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group.
       
       Additionally, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance with a general, under honorable conditions discharge with a  Separation Code of JHJ (i.e., unsatisfactory performance) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3. 

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.  Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a fully honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s 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.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incident of unsatisfactory performance.  
       
       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.  By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  
       
       Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the analyst noted that the unit commander in his memorandum notified the applicant that he was initiating separation action by reason of a pattern of misconduct. However, the analyst determined that this was a harmless error and that the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error on file in this case. 
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he was discharged due to one incident of misconduct during his 2.5 years of service.  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 his 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 since his discharge, he has been serving those serving our country working with the Department of Veterans Affairs.  The analyst acknowledges the applicant’s issue in his application outlining his successful accomplishment since separation from active duty.  The applicant is to be commended for his effort.  However, this accomplishment does not provide the Board a basis upon which to grant relief.   
       
       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: 19 August 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 4 November 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 AR20110001487
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages