Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/01/03	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he requests an upgrade of his discharge to fully honorable.  He contends other Soldiers in the unit failed the urinalysis test and were given another chance, he was not.  He further contends his 1SG was biased against him.  He also contends he served honorably, went to combat and would do it again for his country.       

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: 110223
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110316   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: HHC, 2-87th IN Regt, Fort Drum, NY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 101028, wrongfully used cocaine (100915-100917); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $723 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days, (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  20
Current ENL Date: 080107    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  16 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	03  Yrs, 02  Mos, 10  Days ?????
Total Service:  		03  Yrs, 02  Mos, 10  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: 99   EDU: GED   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Afghanistan  (090515-091229)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ACM-W/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CIB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:     
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed
 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
             The evidence of record shows that on 23 February 2011, 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 misconduct-commission of a serious offense/abuse of illegal drugs for wrongfully using cocaine (100915-100917), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  

             On 24 February 2011, the applicant waived 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 action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

             On 3 March 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge 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 a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues 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 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 applicant contends other Soldiers in the unit failed the urinalysis test and were given another chance, he was not.  The applicant bears the burden of the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his contention.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant provided any evidence, to support the contention that he was treated unjustly.  Moreover, the method in which another Soldier’s case was handled is not relevant to the applicant’s case.  Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case.
       
       Further, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       The applicant further contends his 1SG was biased against him.  Although the applicant alleges his 1SG was biased against him during his military service, there is no evidence in his military records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence supporting this contention.  Therefore, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge.
       
       The applicant also contends he served honorably, went to combat and would do it again for his country.  The analyst considered the quality of his service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge  under review.   
       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: 13 June 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated (111215); and a Soldier Deployment History Outprocessing Report, dated (110315). 

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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
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 AR20120000398
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 3 of 3 pages