Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 2012/04/26	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he would like an upgrade, because he knows what he did was wrong and it not only affected him but it also affected his leaders and his battle buddies around him.  What he did was a one time thing and he had so much regret as soon as he found out.  If he could take back his actions.  The Army made him into the man he is today, a hard worker, great leader, also patience.  The Army was the best thing that ever happened to him.  The friendships he built and the trust he has for his fellow Soldiers and NCOs.  If he had a second chance at being back with his brothers in the military, he wouldn’t think twice about it!  He adds that he enlisted at 18 years of age and discovered that protocol and immaturity do not match.  What he did was an isolated event and extremely irresponsible.  When he discovered that he was being discharged, he was in shock.  He felt totally lost.  The Army is all he knows and he is pleading with the Review Board to please allow this change and allow him a second chance to prove himself.  He did gain other employment after his discharge at a good paying rate, but as he has stated about the Army, it is all he knows.  He found himself missing the brotherhood and trust that he had grown to know through the Army.  He took an oath at MEPS and he blew it himself.  He has no other to blame but himself.  He has learned a most valuable lesson and again pleads with the Review Board to reconsider his request to change his discharge.  His record up until that point of discharge does speak for itself.  He did excel as he learned, but again immaturity faulted him to pursue more things that he is capable of doing.  He is a strong individual and was a good Soldier and wishes to have that opportunity to prove that he can excel and prove his leadership capabilities.  He expresses his appreciation for the Board’s consideration and review of his request. 

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: 101208
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 110126   Chapter: 14-12c(2)    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	RE:    SPD: JKK  Unit/Location: E Co, 125th BSB, 3rd Inf BCT, 1AD, Fort Bliss, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 100913, wrongful use of methylenedioxymethamphetamine (Ecstasy) (100622-100625), reduced to E-1; forfeiture of $723 (suspended); 45-day extra duty and restriction; 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: 070910    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  22 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 04 Mos, 17 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 04 Mos, 17 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92G (Food Service Operation)   GT: 95   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM; NDSM; GWOTSM; KDSM; ASR; OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State 
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states, in effect, that he is currently employed in a good paying rate.
VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 8 December 2010, 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—for wrongful use of methylenedioxymethamphetamine (Ecstasy), a scheduledI controlled substance (100622-100625), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 17 December 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 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.  
       
       On 7 January 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 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 being absent 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 and document submitted with the application, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable.  
       
       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. 
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted that 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 by abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and clearly diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  
       
       Further, the analyst noted that 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 analyst also noted the applicant's issues about his desire to rejoin the Service.  However, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4.  An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is not eligible to reenlist.  
       
       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: 21 September 2012         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293, dated 18 April 2012; DD Form 214 for service under current 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 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: 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 AR20120008373
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages