Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2007/1010 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The Applicant states that he is veteran from Desert Storm and believes he deserves an Honorable Discharge for having been there. He wants to attend Indiana Tech College and would like to use his GI Bill, he believes he has earned the right to use his GI Bill. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: None See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 931005 Discharge Received: Date: 931028 Chapter: 14-12c(2) AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: A Troop, 3-4 Cavalry Sqdn, Schweinfurt, GE Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 830727, wrongful use of marijuana (930608-930707), reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $456.00 x 2, 45 days extra duty and restriction (FG) 930210, driving while intoxicated, reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $300, extra duty for 45 days (FG) Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 31 Current ENL Date: 900501 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 05Mos, 28Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 05Mos, 28Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 19D/Cavalry Scout GT: 103 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany, SWA Combat: SWA (901210-910428) Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, ASR, SWASM-BSS, KLM, Valerous Unit Award V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Elkhart, IN Post Service Accomplishments: None listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. 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. He was advised of his rights. 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 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 15 October 1993, 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 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 he submitted, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable. 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 service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Furthermore the analyst noted the applicant’s issue, however, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the 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 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: 12 September 2008 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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 Issue a new DD Form 214 Colonel, U.S. Army Change Characterization to: President, Army Discharge Review Board Change Reason to: Other: None RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070014054 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 pages