Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/05/06 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, "I would like to be a police officer and an honorable discharge would greatly help me". 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: 060821 Discharge Received: Date: 060906 Chapter: 14-12c AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct, Serious Offense RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: 368th Cargo Transportation Company, Ft Eustis, VA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060611, wrongfully possess some amount of marijuana (060308); forfeiture of $636 per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days, oral reprimand (FG). 060306, wrongfully use of marijuana (051029-060104) and wrongfully use of cocaine (051107-051207); reduction to E1, forfeiture of $636 pay per monthf ro two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days, oral reprimand (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 22 Current ENL Date: 050308 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 05Mos, 29Days ????? Total Service: 4 Yrs, 06Mos, 27Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAF 011218-050115/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 88H10 Cargo Specialist GT: 107 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AFGCM, NDSM x2, GWOTSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Jersey Cit, NJ 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 21 August 2006, 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 commission of a serious offense, for receiving an Article 15 for wrongfully using marijuana (051029-060104), wrongfully using cocaine (051204-051207), receiving a second Article 15 on 060711 for possession of marijuana (060308) and on 060628 being notified again the test results from a command directed urinalysis on 060517 for testing positive for cocaine, including 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 and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army 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 August 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. The record contains a CID Report dated 5 July 2006. 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, and the issue 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 biochemical test that was part of the applicant’s Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan. This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the analyst recommends 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: 17 February 2010 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 noted that the government introduced the results of a command directed urinalysis into the discharge process. This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of a fully honorable discharge. Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, the board found that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record 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: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090008650 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages