Application Receipt Date: 061024	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See applicant’s attached DD Form 293 and supporting documents

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: GD   Date: 990127
Discharge Received: GD    Date: 990225   
Chapter: 14-12c (2)   AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct
RE:  RE-4   SPD: JKK
Unit/Location: HQ, US Army Europe, Wiesbaden Germany, APO AE  09096 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 990104, on or near Wiesbaden Germany, between on or about 29 October 1998, and on or about 29 November 1998, wrongfully use Marijuana, which is a controlled substance.  Violation of Article 112 9a), UCMJ.  Reduction to E-2, forfeiture $519 x 2, 30 days extra duty and restriction (FG).

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  730507  
Current ENL Date: 970423    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 10Mos, 03Days 
Total Service:  5 Yrs, 04Mos, 13Days, include 0/6/10 of inactive service
Previous Discharges: RA 931013-961012 /HD
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: Hospital Food Svc Spc/91M10   GT: 098   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Germany Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, HSM, ASR, UNM
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: 050101 – State of Minnesota Board of Pharmacy, Pharmacy technician registration,  

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:  Evidence of record shows that on 27 January 1999, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct – failed to report on several occasions, disrespect toward a superior commissioned officer, failure to keep sufficient funds in your account, and wrongful use of marijuana, with a general, under 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 reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  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 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, 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 she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  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 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: Record Review		Date: 
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 5    No change 0    - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - Reason
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, determined that the characterization of service was too harsh.  The Board found that the overall length and quality of the applicant’s service, the time that has elapsed since her discharge and her post service accomplishments, mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  Further, the Board found that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted not to change the narrative reason on the DD Form 214 from misconduct.  

Case report reviewed and verified by: Gloria Blake, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: Honorable  
Change Reason to: ?????
Other: ?????
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: ?????

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060015153

Applicant Name:  Ms.      
______________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 4 pages