Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/03/02	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states: "I was discharged unjustly. A higher ranking SSGT was place in my single man room without my permission. The Nco was married and living off post. I was on Special Duty Assignment upon return, he had been staying in my room. I later pcs'ed and later administered a unit urinalysis, in which I failed. It was later discovered that something was in my shake mix used for workout supplement. It was determined the it was placed in the mix and not from the company. No one else had access to this mix which sat on top of refrigerator in my room. I asked for Court Martial to prove my case. However, I was dealt a life changing unjust, due to someone else problem. I now have names of NCO and 1st Sgt., it was later found that the NCO was using Cocaine. How or when it was placed in product, is unknown to me. I do know that it ended my Military Career, Unjustly.  It has placed an indescribable hardship on my life.  I reentered the US Army to fulfill my career. Now, I can't apply for any Gov/ State job. I'm Embarrassed, A loner, Devorsed, Humiliated, Traumatized, Depressed, just to name a few.  I've even tried to reenter service, and cannot, due RE3 and Discharge. Can't apply on any Military Post.  I love the Military. It was and still is my life.  Now I've lost my life due to a former Soldier's short comings and Drug use.  I feel I can at least start to heal. with this assistance." 

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: 980722
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 981119   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: C Co, TNG SPT BN, Fort Jackson, SC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 980619, Wrongful use of cocaine between (980426 and 980527), reduction to E4; forfeiture of $717.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended); 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:  34
Current ENL Date: 980312    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 08  Mos, 08  Days ?????
Total Service:  		12 Yrs, 02  Mos, 24  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-860829-900228/HD
                                       USARCG-900301-901022/NA
                                       AFR-901023-940201/NA
                                       RA-940202-980311/HD
Highest Grade: E5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 73C10/Finance Specialist   GT: 107   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-3, JSAM, AGCM, NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-2

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 22 July 1998, 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 the wrongful use of cocaine between (980426 and 980527), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 4 August 1998, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board.  The applicant did not submit a statement on 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 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 12 August 1998, the senior intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended the applicant's discharge be referred to an administrative separation board to consider whether the applicant should be separated from the Army.
       
       On 27 August 1998, the separation authority referred the applicant's discharge to a standing separation board to determined whether the applicant should be separated from the Army.
       
       On 31 August 1998, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights.  On 30 September 1998 and again 9 October 1998, the administrative separation board convened.  The applicant appeared with counsel.  The board recommended the applicant be discharged with issuance of a character of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       On 10 November 1998, the separation authority approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
       
       The applicant's record contains a CID Report, dated 29 June 1998.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 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 documents, and the issues submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  
       
       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 his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting 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 applicant contends he was unjustly discharge.  However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence or documentation to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged.  The applicant’s statement alone does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.  
       
       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 analyst noted the applicant's issue about being unable to apply for government or state job, however, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry (RE) codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  The applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  The analyst found no basis upon which to recommend a change to the applicant’s reason for discharge.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.
       
       Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       In view of the foregoing, 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: 3 August 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application, dated 2 March 2012, Discharge Orders, dated 16 November 1998, and DD Form 214 for the period of service under 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						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 1    No change 4
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: NA
Other: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

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 AR20120004487
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 4 pages