Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 081027 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 080929 Discharge Received: Date: 081008 Chapter: 14-12c(2) AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: E Co., 1st BCT (Prov), 101st Airborne Div (AA) (Rear) (Prov), Fort Campbell, KY Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080809, Wrongfully wore upon his uniform the grade of Specialist; Forfeiture of $673.00 pay per month for 2 months, restriction and extra duty for 45 days, suspended. (FG) 080313, Wrongfully used Benzodiazepine, a schedule III controlled substance, while on duty as a sentinel or lookout while serving in Iraq; Reduction to E1, forfeiture of $670.00 pay per month for 2 months, 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: 19 Current ENL Date: 050728 Current ENL Term: 03 Years 16 weeks Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 02 Mos, 11 Days Applicant's DD Form 214, block 12a, erroneously indicates Applicant entered active duty. Correct date is 050728. Total Service: 03 Yrs, 02 Mos, 11 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11C Indirect Fire Infantryman GT: 116 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq x 2 (051222-060920 & 070922-080418) Decorations/Awards: ICM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, CIB, EIB V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Irondale, AL Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the Applicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 24 September 2008, 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 wrongfully using benzodiazepine, a schedule III controlled substance while on duty as a sentinel or a lookout in Iraq and, wearing his specialist rank once he returned to the rear detachment and he lied to his superiors upon his return about his prior UCMJ action, with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The Applicant was advised of his rights, 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. On 2 October 2008, 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 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 the Applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the application, 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 the former Soldier’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By the misconduct, the Applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a 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 record does not support the Applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the Applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Therefore, 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: 12 August 2009 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 1 No change 4 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080017454 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages