Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/01/30 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attched documents submitted by the applicant. 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: 980707 Discharge Received: Date: 980827 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: B Co, 168th EN Bn, Fort Lewis, WA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 980527, wrongfully used marijuana before, on or about (980324), reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $590 X 2, $200 (suspended), and 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: 23 Current ENL Date: 971216 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 08Mos, 12Days ????? Total Service: 06 Yrs, 00Mos, 02Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-920616-950521/HD RA-950522-971215/HD Highest Grade: E-5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 12B10 Combat Engineer GT: 123 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM-3, AGCM, NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Broken Arrow, OK Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims in a statement that he is a Terminal Manager for Beaver Express Trucking Company. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 7 July 1998, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense for wrongful use of marijuana on two separate occasions; willfully and without authority damaged military property of the United States; assault consumated by battery, failed to report for duty on several occasions; disrespectful in language towards a NCO and disobeyed a lawful order on several occasions, 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, unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, 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 12 August 1998, 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, but a general discharge 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 and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a NCO. The applicant, as a NCO, 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 general or fully honorable discharge. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant issues; however, did not find said issues sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. Additionally, 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 that 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: 26 November 2008 Location: Washington, DC 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 Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080002340 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages