Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/03/19	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "I was young and irresponsible.  I was in very stressful and depressing situations at the moment of separation.  I was having serious problems with my marriage at the time, for which I enrolled in counseling. I had to declare bankruptcy.  I was trying to advance in my professional career in the military with no help or support from anyone, even though I asked for guidance.  I had to figure it out on my own.  With all those pressures on me, at the age of 22, without knowing how to deal with any of this, I fell in the trap of the drug world as a getaway from every problem I had. I was caught and was not granted rehabilitation of any kind, I was demoted to E-1 immediately, pay taken away in the amount of $463 for 2 months and given extra duty 45/45 while commencing the separation period. Meanwhile one of my coworkers was caught in his third DUI, last name D, only got demoted from specialist to PFC, got extra duty and some rehab and right back to work with no other repercussions whatsoever.  For this reason I think my discharge was unfair and also inequitable because it was a one time occurrence in 2 years and 8 months of continuous service, unlike my coworker who was in his third offense.  I knew this information because we served extra duty together and he explained his situation to me. I explain this for your knowledge.  I was thinking about reenlisting and continuing with a military career but that was shunned away by my own fault.  I request this upgrade in my discharge only because I would like to have my benefits as an ex service member to apply for my VA loan, Va health benefits and to get my G. I. Bill money that I did not get and paid for a thousand dollars.  Since the incident of separation I have changed my life and my way of living.  I graduated College with Honors (G.P.A. 3.93) with two degrees: one for Computer programming as a major and one in Business management as a minor.  I have been working on the telecommunications field as a tower technician for the past 10 years.  Presently I reside in Louisiana and work for the major carriers in the cellphone industry such as verizon, AT & T, T-Mobile and sprint among others covering the south.  Thank you"

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: 980409
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 980505   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: A Co, 2-325th IN Bn (ABN), Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 980319, wrongfully used marijuana (980125-980225); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $463 pay x 2 months (suspended), extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days (suspended), (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 950517    Current ENL Term: 03  Years  17 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	02  Yrs, 11  Mos, 19  Days ?????
Total Service:  		02  Yrs, 11  Mos, 19  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B1P Infantryman   GT: 109   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM (Post Service), NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:   
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated in his application he graduated college with honors (G.P.A. 3.93), with two degrees, computer programming as a major and business management as a minor.  He has been working in the telecommunications field as a tower technician for the past 10 years and does work for the major carriers in the cell phone industry such as Verizon, AT & T, T-Mobile and Sprint among others covering the south. 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 9 April 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 wrongfully using marijuana, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 10 April 1998, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated he intended to submit a statement in 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 of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.   
         
       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 issue 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 possessing 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 he was young and irresponsible.  The applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.
       
       The applicant further contends being in very stressful and depressing situations at the time of separation, he was having serious problems in his marriage and used drugs to deal with the problems. While the applicant may believe his stress at home and marriage problems were the underlying cause of his misconduct; however, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. 
       
              The applicant also contends another Soldier was caught for his third DUI and only got demoted from Specialist to PFC,  extra duty and some rehab and right back to work with no other repercussions; for this reason his discharge was unfair and  inequitable because it was a one time occurrence in 2 years and 8 months of continuous service.  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, even though a single incident, 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. 
       
       The analyst having examined all the circumstances 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. 
       
       Also, 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 desires to receive VA benefits.  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. 
       
       The applicant additionally contends since his discharge he has changed his life and way of living.  The applicant is to be commended for his effort.  This contention is not a matter on which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion relating to the discharge process nor is it associated with the discharge at the time of issuance.  
       
       Furthermore, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the  accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 
       
       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: 15 August 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application, dated (120304); two (2) EDP, College of Puerto Rico, Associate and Bachelor Degrees, dated (060818, 060818); and a DD Form 214, dated (980505). 







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 AR20120005299
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 4 of 4 pages