| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann H. Langston | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member | ||
| Mr. Allen L. Raub | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his lost time be expunged from his record; that his rank be restored to specialist/E-4 (SPC/E-4); that his reentry (RE) code be changed to RE-1; that the characterization of his service be changed to honorable; and that his GI Bill be restored.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was not absent without leave (AWOL), and he wants to go back into the Army to serve his country. In the issues the applicant provided to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), he claimed that he was discharged on charges that he was absent without leave (AWOL) and for illegal drug use. He claims that he was wrongly accused of these charges and his chain of command coerced him into making false statements.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 10 February 2000, he enlisted in the Regular Army for four years. He successfully completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina and advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Upon completed of AIT, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 62E (Construction Equipment Operator).
The applicant’s record shows that during his active duty tenure he completed an overseas tour in Korea and he earned the National Defense Service Medal, Army Achievement Medal, Army Service Ribbon, and Overseas Service Ribbon. There are no other acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition recorded in his record. However, there is evidence of a disciplinary history that includes his being AWOL for 10 days between 19 and
28 January 2002.
The applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) also shows in Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was SPC/E-4. This item also confirms that he was reduced to private/E-1 (PV1/E-1) on 21 February 2002.
The record does not include a separation packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation processing. However, it does include a separation document (DD Form 214) that confirms the authority and reason for his separation. On the date of his separation, the applicant authenticated this document with his signature in Item 21 (Signature of Member Being Separated), thereby verifying that the information contained therein was correct at that time.
The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that on 7 June 2002, he was separated and received a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD), under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c(2), by reason of misconduct. It also shows that at the time of his separation, he held the rank of PV1, he had completed a total of 2 years, 3 months, and 18 days of creditable active military service, and he had accrued 10 days of lost time due to AWOL. This document also confirms that based on the authority and reason for his discharge, the applicant was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKK, and a reentry code of
RE-3.
On 6 January 2003, the ADRB found that the characterization and reason for the applicant’s discharge were both proper and equitable, and it voted to deny the applicant’s request that GD be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 contains the policy guidance for separation by reason of misconduct. Paragraph 14-12c contains the policy for separation for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, and sub-paragraph (2) pertains to the separating drug offenders. These provisions provides that individuals identified as drug abusers may be separated prior to their normal expiration of term of service. The issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The SPD code of JKK was the appropriate code for the applicant based on the guidance provided in AR 635-5-1 for soldiers separating under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c(2), by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense, drug offender. Additionally, the SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table establishes RE Code 3 as the proper reentry code to assign to soldiers separated for this reason.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The Board notes the applicant’s contentions that he was not AWOL and that he was coerced into making false statements by his chain of command, and it also carefully considered his relief requests. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s allegations or to support requested relief.
2. The applicant’s record does not contain a separation packet and is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge. However, the Board notes that it does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 that he authenticated with his signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge, and the Board presumes government regularity in the discharge process.
3. There is no evidence of record or independent evidence provided by the applicant that supports his allegations. Lacking evidence to the contrary, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Therefore, the Board finds an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.
4. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__JHL__ __ LE _ __ ALR __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003083664 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/02/20 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 2002/06/07 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C14 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Misconduct |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 189 | 110.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013100
On 26 April 2006, the applicant's command initiated separation proceedings under Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 14-12c, by reason of misconduct - commission of a serious offense. The applicant's original DD Form 214 shows the following: a. discharge under other than honorable conditions with 5 years, 2 months, and 16 days of creditable active service and 276 days of lost time; b. separation in pay grade E-1; c....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021420
On 4 September 2008, the separation authority approved the unit commander's request and directed that the applicant be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), with a general discharge. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation, provided the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003333
On 15 April 2008, the applicant was informed of his unit commander's intent to process him for separation under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense (abuse of illegal drugs). However, by regulation, the RE-4 code assigned to the applicant was the proper code to assign members separating under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c for misconduct (Drug Abuse). _______...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000789
The applicant states, in effect, that his record of promotions showed he was a good Soldier. Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant completed an election of rights in which he requested consideration of his case by a board of officers, personal appearance before a board of officers, and consulting counsel. The version of Chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time of the applicant's discharge, was relatively the same as the current version of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009421
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was separated under the provisions of Paragraph 14-12c, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense (drug abuse) based...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004608
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(2), by reason of "Misconduct" with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions, a separation code of "JKK," and an RE code of "3." Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designators) states that separation codes are three-character alphabetic combinations, which identify reasons for, and types of separation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007125
The applicant provides the record of his Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) hearing and associated documents in support of his application. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was separated under the provisions of Paragraph 14-12c, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense (abuse of illegal drugs) based on his multiple incidents of illegal use of marijuana and cocaine. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012830
On 23 February 2007, the separation authority approved his discharge action under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, with the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. His re-issued DD Form 214 shows he was discharged by reason of misconduct (drug abuse) in the rank/grade of PV1/E-1 on 2 March 2007 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, with a character of service of under honorable conditions (general). The evidence of record also...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016306
The applicant requests, in effect, that his character of service, separation authority, separation code, reentry (RE) code, and the narrative reason for his separation on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed. The DD Form 214 also shows that his character of service was general, under honorable conditions; the separation authority was Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c (2) (commission of a serious offense - abuse of illegal drugs); the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020977
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 26 December 2002 to show: * completion of first full term of service * rank/grade of specialist (SPC)/E-4 instead of private (PV1)/E-1 * reentry eligibility (RE) code of 1 instead RE code 3 2. There is no evidence in the applicant's record that shows he was advanced to the rank/grade of SPC/E-4 during his period of service. The applicant contends that his...