Application Receipt Date: 060512	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293

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: 030203
Discharge Received:     Date: 030501   
Chapter: 14    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:     SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: 110th Quartermaster Company, 260th Quartermaster Battalion, Hunter Army Airfield, GA   

Time Lost: AWOL 24 days (021018-021025 and 021030-021114)

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020820/Wrongful use of marijuana/FG

021017/FTR X12, making a false statement, disobeying a lawful order, disrespect to an officer/FG

030127/FTR/CG

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): SCM/021122/Two periods of AWOL

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  840526  
Current ENL Date: 011120    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 04Mos, 18Days ?????
Total Service:  01 Yrs, 04Mos, 18Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 77F10 (Petroleum Supply Specialist)   GT: 109   EDU: General   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: Has completed 36 hours of college credits towards a degree in psychology with a 3.2 GPA.  She also states that she is in a honors program, is the VP of the writing club, and she serves as the president of the PSI beta/psycholody club.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 3 February 2003, 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 (testing positive for substance abuse (marijuana), derelict in duty and FTR on numerous occasions), with a under other than honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  The applicant 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.  The intermediate commander's reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a under other than honorable conditions discharge.  Records show that the applicant requested consideration of her case by a administrative separation board.  On 10 April 2003, the board convened and found that the applicant was not desirable for further service in the Army.  The board recommended that the applicant be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 17 April 2003, the separation authority approved the findings of the board and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of an under other than honorable conditions discharge, and that she be reduced to the lowest enlisted pay grade.
      

      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, 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, and the issue submitted, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By her misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  Therefore, the analyst determined that reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends the Board vote to deny relief in this case. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 061204              
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     No change    (Character)
		 			       	Change     No change    (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 not to change it.





















Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, 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: 

ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 061207
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060006829

Applicant Name:  Ms.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages