Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/17	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

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: 060305
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060523   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: Medical Co, USAMEDDAC, Fort Benning, GA 

Time Lost: AWOL for 31 days (050605-050705), apprehended.  

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060530, wrongful use of marijuana (060130); reduction to E-1, and 45 days extra duty (FG).

050818, AWOL x 2, absent from his unit until apprehended, to wit: Medical Company (050630-050705), and absent from his place of duty, to wit: Emergency Room, located at Martin Army Community Hospital; extra duty for 14 days (Summarized).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  25
Current ENL Date: 041025    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 05Mos, 28Days ?????
Total Service:  		07 Yrs, 01Mos, 14Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-990309-020320/HD
                                       RA-020321-041024/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91W10 Health Care Spec   GT: 83   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii/Sinai Peninusula   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, AGCM, GWOTSM, HSM, ASR, OSR, MFOM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Memphis, TN
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed







 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 5 March 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 a positive urinalysis, wrongful use and possession of marijuana, AWOL, failure to report to his appointed place of duty, and stealing cab fare, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action,  voluntarily and unconditionally waived consideration his case by an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The senior intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 4 May 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than 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, 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 during the period of enlistment under review and the issues 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 command directed urinalysis 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 characterization of service.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends that relief be granted in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined 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: 2 October 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 does not concur with the recommendation of the analyst that the characterization of the applicant’s service is improper.  The Board noted that the discharge packet contained the results of a urinalysis report coded "CO."  However, the Board determined that the code was in all likelihood entered in error.  The Board based its determination on the evidence contained in the applicant's record which showed he was arrested by civil authorities and charged with possession of marijuana, tested positive for marijuana after being returned to military control, received a field grade Article 15 for testing positive for marijuana, and had the opportunity to consult with legal counsel who would have informed him if the Limited Use Policy applied before accepting the Article 15.  In view of these facts, the Board concluded that the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error on file in this case.  Therefore, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 
       
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: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090001363
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages