Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110011013
Original file (AR20110011013.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/05/17	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he is requesting an upgrade of his characterization of service so that he can find a job and would also like to know about the health care and GI Bill benefits he might be entitled to.

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: 101220
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110205   Chapter: 14-12c (2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: F Company, 2nd Squadron, 2nd Stryker Cavalry Regiment, Iraq APO, AE 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 101201, wrongfully possessed and used some amount of marijuana in the hashish form between (100801-101122), made an official statement to a Major, which statement was totally false (100822), reduction to Private (E-1), forfeiture of $723.00 pay per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days and a oral reprimand (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 090603    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  16 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 8 Mos, 3 Days ?????
Total Service:  		1 Yrs, 8 Mos, 3 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: 89   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Southwest Asia, Germany   Combat: Afghanistan, dates-NIF)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

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 9 December 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c (2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs; in that he wrongfully possessed and used some amount of marijuana in the hashish form between (100801-101122) and made an official statement, which was false.  The unit commander recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  On 19 December 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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 21 December 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.  

       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.  
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue requesting that his discharge be upgraded so that he can find a job and would also like to know about the health care and GI Bill benefits he might be entitled to.  The Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or 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: 9 December 2011         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 dated 1 April 2011.







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

Official:




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder




















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 AR20110011013
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110015248

    Original file (AR20110015248.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 November 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. 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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110024329

    Original file (AR20110024329.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 24 November 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 analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because his quality of service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080005834

    Original file (AR20080005834.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110022206

    Original file (AR20110022206.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that the 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 for failing to report that SPC L, had given him hashish, and he failed to properly clear SPC E's weapon when coming on the COP McClain, and he also distributed hashis to two other Soldiers with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. ...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090010488

    Original file (AR20090010488.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070014054

    Original file (AR20070014054.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2007/1010 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 5 October 1993, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for abuse of illegal drugs and for driving while drunk, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100022442

    Original file (AR20100022442.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? None of the soldiers, myself included, ever received any form of drug abuse counseling or rehabilitation. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 9 March 2009, 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 wrongfully using marijuana (081201-081215) and wrongfully using hashish while in...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100017989

    Original file (AR20100017989.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100011018

    Original file (AR20100011018.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011625

    Original file (AR20090011625.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 1 December 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c (2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, abuse of illegal drugs; in that he did on 080723, while being questioned by CID Agents, admitted in a sworn statement, that he wrongfully used and distributed Percocet, a schedule II controlled substance, with a general, under...