Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/09 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached document 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: 061213 Discharge Received: Date: 061221 Chapter: 14-12c AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense) RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: 551st Med Co (Log), 62d Med Bde, Fort Lewis, WA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 061010, Wrongful use of marijuana between (060727 and 060825), reduction to E1, forfeiture of $636.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), 45 days extra duty, and 45 days restriction, (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: 030709 Current ENL Term: 05 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 05Mos, 13Days ????? Total Service: 06 Yrs, 02Mos, 05Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-001017-030708/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 68A10/Medical Equipment Rep/13P10/MLRS/Fire Dir Spec GT: 116 EDU: GED Overseas: Yugoslavia, Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (040228-050113) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM-4, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KCM, ASR, OSR-2 V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 December 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense for abuse of illegal drugs, 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, waived consideration of his cas by an administrative separation board, contingent upon his receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions, and submitted 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 14 December 2006 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 all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the document, and the issues he submitted, the analyst determined that the characterization of service is improper. The analyst noted that the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a command directed competence for duty (i.e., fitness for duty) biochemical test. This is limited use information as defined in Chapter 6, AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. However, the analyst found that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 5 August 2009 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 characterization of service is improper. The Board noted that the government introduced the results of a command directed urinalysis into the discharge process. This is limited use information as defined in Chapter 6, AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable discharge. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 5 No change 0 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090000612 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages