Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/05/20	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents 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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 010315   Chapter: 14-12b    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKA   Unit/Location: 765th Transportation BN, Ft Eustis, VA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 001030, fail to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty (000911), failed to submit a DA Form 31 for a mileage pass and failed to inform your supervisor that you were leaving the local area for the weekend (000617); reduced to E3, forfeiture of $294 pay; 14 days extra duty and 14 days restriction (CG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 991221    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	1 Yrs, 02Mos, 25Days ?????
Total Service:  		4 Yrs, 03Mos, 21Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-961125-991220/HD (immediate reenlistment)
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 71L10/ Admin Spec   GT: 98   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, OSR, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
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 16 February 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b(2), AR 635-200, by reason of patterns of misconduct in that she missed five PT formations, (000906, 000830, 000602, 000524 & 000519) and for testing positive during a random unit urinalysis (000923) with trace amount of THC indicating the 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 submitted a statement in her own behalf.  The statement is not part of the available record.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army 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.
       
       The record contains a CID Investigation dated 16 November 2000 citing the applicant as the subject for wrongful use of marijuana. 

       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 all the applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the application, 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 the former Soldier’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of 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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Further, the evidence of record shows that the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting herself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.  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: 25 January 2010         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: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090009862
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages