Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 08/10/20 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documentation 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: 070615 Discharge Received: Date: 070719 Chapter: 14-12c(2) AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) RE: SPD: JKK Unit/Location: 3rd Sqdrn, 17th Cav Reg (Rear), 10th Mtn Div (LI), Ft. Drum, NY Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 22 Current ENL Date: 050421 Current ENL Term: 04 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 02 Mos, 29 Days Moral Waiver Total Service: 02 Yrs, 02 Mos, 29 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 63B Wheeled Veh Rpr GT: 115 EDU: College Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Moravian Falls, NC 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 14 June 2007, the unit commander notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for wrongfully using marijuana (070416-070516), with a general under honorable conditions discharge. The Applicant was advised of her rights, consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, 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. On 27 June 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 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 carefully examining the Applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the issue and documents submitted with the application, 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. The analyst noted the Applicant's issue, however, at the time of discharge the Applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.” An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 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: 7 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 0 No change 5 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 AR20080016459 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 pages