Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/11/13	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant in which the Applicant states, "Trying to get upgrade so I can get my GI Bill Benefits."

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: Undated
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030630   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HHC, USA Garrison, Special Troops Bn, Dragon Bde, XVIII Airborne Corps, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 030425, Wrongful use of marijuana between 030126-030226; Punishment is illegible (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  17
Current ENL Date: 980806    Current ENL Term: 06 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	04 Yrs, 10 Mos, 25 Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 10 Mos, 25 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 74B  Info Sys Opr Analyst   GT: 104   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR, OSR;  AAM, AGCM (not listed on the Applicant's DD Form 214)

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Lexington, KY
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 19 May 2003, 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 marijuana during urinalysis testing on 26 February 2003, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  The Applicant was advised of his rights, consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the impact of the discharge action.  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 27 May 2003, 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 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, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the Applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  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: 26 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 AR20080018393
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 2 pages