Application Receipt Date: 080423 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 070410 Discharge Received: Date: 070530 Chapter: 14 AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense) RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: C Co, 626th BSB, 3rd BCT, Fort Campbell, KY Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 070228, Wrongful use of marijuana between (061231 and 070131), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $650.00 pay per month for two months, 45 days restriction, and 45 days extra duty (suspended), (FG). Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 860118 Current ENL Date: 050510 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00Mos, 20Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 00Mos, 20Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 68W10/Health Care Specialist GT: 118 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (060224-060907) Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 10 April 2007, 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 testing positive for marijuana on a urinalysis, with a honorable discharge. She was advised of her rights. The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in her 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 with a honorable discharge. On 11 May 2007, 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 issue she submitted, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of her faithful and honorable service, as well as her record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the length and quality of the applicant's service, to include her combat service and the recommendation of the unit and intermediate commanders for approval with a honorable discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 27 June 2008 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change 0 No change 5 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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. Case report reviewed and verified by: Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change 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 and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 1 July 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080006295 Applicant Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages