Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 081209 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See attached DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant. Applicant states, "I request an upgrade because it is warranted. My punishment was severe for the infraction." II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: Yes See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 010606 Discharge Received: Date: 010801 Chapter: 14-12C AR: 635-200 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: JKQ Unit/Location: HHC, 40th Sig Bn, 11th Sig Bde, Ft Huachuca, AZ Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): Evidence of record indicates the Applicant received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMR) on 010625 for two times marijuana use. Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 19 Current ENL Date: 980428 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 03 Mos, 04 Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 03 Mos, 04 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 31L10 Wire Sys Installer GT: 107 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA (990920-001018) Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Sanford, FL Post Service Accomplishments: None listed by the Applicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 1 June 2001, 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 having tested positive for illegal use of marijuana on 27 February 2001 and 26 April 2001, 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 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 11 July 2001, 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 he submitted, 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 coded RO, rehabilitation testing. 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 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: 13 April 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 noted that the government introduced the results of a biochemical test that was coded RO 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 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: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090000641 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 pages