Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087831C070212
Original file (2003087831C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


                  IN THE CASE OF:
        


                  BOARD DATE: 6 November 2003
                  DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003087831

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Ms. Wanda L. Waller Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Stanley Kelley Chairperson
Mr. Raymond J. Wagner Member
Ms. Mae M. Bullock Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)


APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. He also requests that his narrative reason for separation be changed.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he smoked marijuana on a few occasions and subsequently tested positive on a urinalysis. He contends that he made some bad decisions but he was not dependent on marijuana. He further states that he was informed that his discharge would be automatically upgraded after six months. He contends that his attempts to get a good job have been unsuccessful because of his narrative reason for separation. In support of his application, he submits an undated letter of explanation and a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted on 5 January 1983 for a period of 4 years. He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training in military occupational specialty 05B (radio operator). He served in Grenada from
25 October 1983 through 2 November 1983.

On 13 September 1984, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for using marijuana. His punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duty.

On 18 February 1986, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for going from his appointed place of duty without authority. His punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 (suspended for 90 days), restriction, and extra duty.

On 28 February 1986, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for using marijuana. His punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duty.

On 17 March 1986, the applicant was notified of his pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (drug abuse). The unit commander cited that the applicant was a two-time drug offender.

On 17 March 1986, the applicant consulted with counsel and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge were issued. Also, he elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf.

On 24 March 1986, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for failure to repair. His punishment consisted of 7 days of correctional custody (suspended for 30 days) and a forfeiture of pay.

The unit commander initiated action to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (drug abuse).

The intermediate commander concurred with the recommendation for separation.

On 20 March 1986, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed the issuance of a general discharge.

Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 2 April 1986 with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (abuse of illegal drugs). He had served
3 years, 2 months and 28 days of total active service.

Item 25 on the applicant's DD Form 214 shows the entry, "AR [Army Regulation] 635-200, Chap [Chapter] 14 Para [Paragraph] 12c Section III."

Item 26 on the applicant's DD Form 214 shows the entry, "JKK."

Item 28 on the applicant's DD Form 214 shows the entry, "MISCONDUCT - DRUG ABUSE."

There is no indication in the available records which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from active duty. Chapter 14, in effect at the time, established policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories included minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, and abuse of illegal drugs. This regulation states, in pertinent part, that first-time drug offenders in grades E6 to E9 would be processed for separation upon discovery of a drug offense. Second-time drug offenders in grades E1 to E9 would be processed after a second offense. The regulation also states, in pertinent part, that abuse of illegal drugs is serious misconduct and separation action normally will be based upon commission of a serious offense. The separation reason in all separations authorized by this paragraph (abuse of illegal drugs) will be "misconduct - abuse of illegal drugs." The issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the member's overall record.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

The U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. The Defense Discharge Review Standards specifically state that no factors should be established which would require automatic change or denial of a change in discharge.

Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators (SPD) to be used for these stated reasons. The codes listed in parentheses are transmitter codes. Where a transmitter code and an SPD code are listed, both codes will be entered in item 26 on the DD Form 214.

Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at the time, states the reason for discharge based on separation code “JPC (JKK)” is “Drug abuse rehabilitation failure” and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9.

Army Regulation 635-5-1 states the reason for discharge based on separation code “JKQ (JKH)” is “Misconduct - commission of a serious offense” and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c.

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. 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.

2. A discharge upgrade is not automatic and there is no evidence which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a discharge upgrade within the 15-year statute of limitations.

3. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

4. The issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate; however, the separation authority directed the issuance of a general discharge in this case.

5. The applicant’s record of service included four nonjudicial punishments and for that reason his quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an honorable discharge.

6. Evidence of record clearly shows the applicant was a second-time drug offender and discharged for misconduct due to abuse of illegal drugs. Therefore, his narrative reason for separation is correct as reflected in item 28 on his DD Form 214.

7. It seems that item 26 on the applicant's DD Form 214 is incorrect. However, the correct separation code of “JKQ (JKH)” would appear to place the applicant in a worse position than currently and the Board will not amend item 26 without a specific request from the applicant.

8. 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

SK_____ RJW____ MMB_____ DENY APPLICATION



                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records




INDEX

CASE ID AR2003087831
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 20031106
TYPE OF DISCHARGE GD
DATE OF DISCHARGE 19860402
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200, Chapter 14
DISCHARGE REASON Misconduct (abuse of illegal drugs)
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 110.0200
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003167

    Original file (20110003167.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. By an undated memorandum, the applicant's commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14 (Misconduct), paragraph 14-12c. The evidence also shows that the applicant tested positive for THC as a result of testing on or about 15 May 1985, 45 days after he was promoted to SP5.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110005275

    Original file (20110005275.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 August 1988, the applicant's unit commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14 (Misconduct), paragraph 14-12c for serious misconduct based on his multiple drug offenses. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed discharge under other than honorable conditions. __________X____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003844

    Original file (20090003844.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 5 June 1986 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (abuse of illegal drugs). The regulation states the reason for discharge based on separation code “JKK” is “Misconduct – Drug Abuse." Evidence of record shows the applicant, a SGT, was discharged for misconduct due to commission of a serious offense (abuse of illegal drugs).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03094545C070212

    Original file (03094545C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 February 1986 the applicant's commanding officer notified her that he was initiating proceedings to administratively separate her from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, misconduct – abuse of illegal drugs. She made a statement calling attention to her many years of good, responsible, and loyal service to the Army, and her participation in numerous off duty events, indicating that she deserved a discharge of at least under honorable conditions....

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020526

    Original file (20130020526.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 24 October 1985, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c and d. The reason for his proposed action was the applicant's positive urinalysis as a noncommissioned officer (NCO). In his statement, he requested he be given an honorable discharge based upon his outstanding record of 6 years and 9 months of service. The evidence...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017672

    Original file (20140017672.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His record does not contain orders or recommendations for award of the Silver Star or Soldier's Medal. Since his record does not contain orders for these awards, nor does he met the regulatory criteria prescribed for either award, there is insufficient evidence to justify awarding these awards or adding them to his DD Form 214. d. Since eligibility for these awards has not been established, they cannot be used for promotion points. His record does not contain and he has not provided any...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075003C070403

    Original file (2002075003C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 December 1987, the commander also notified the applicant that she was initiating a recommendation to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 12c, for misconduct. On 4 February 1988, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for drug abuse rehabilitation failure. Army Regulation 635-200 serves as the authority for enlisted separations.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060016977

    Original file (20060016977.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 June 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060016977 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1 on 4 December 1985 with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12d, for misconduct (drug abuse). Pertinent...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011781

    Original file (20080011781.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel contends that the applicant subsequently retained the services of a North Carolina attorney to assist him in filing a request for reconsideration based on new evidence (that both urine specimens were collected on 12 August 1985 rather than on two separate dates as discussed by the ABCMR). On 24 October 1985, the applicant was notified of his pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct (drug abuse). Evidence of record shows the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014052

    Original file (20100014052.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He further acknowledged that if he received a discharge certificate/character of service which was less than honorable, he could make an application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) or the ABCMR for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 27 March 1986 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, misconduct, abuse of illegal drugs. Additionally, paragraph 14-3 states that an under other than honorable discharge...