Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006221C070206
Original file (20050006221C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        13 December 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050006221


      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.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Beverly A. Young              |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Shirley Powell                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Melvin Meyer                  |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Allen Raub                    |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that her Reentry Eligibility (RE) code be
upgraded from RE-4 to RE-2 so she can reenlist.

2.  The applicant states that she was not given the chance to rehabilitate
in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 1, paragraphs 1-15 and
1-16; chapter 3, paragraphs 3-1, 3-4, 3-7, 3-11 and 3-12; and chapter 4,
paragraphs
4-1, 4-2, 4-7, 4-8 and 4-10.

3.  The applicant provides a sworn statement; her DD Form 214 (Certificate
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); a DA Form 4856 (Developmental
Counseling Form); a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15,
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)); a portion of chapter 14 discharge
proceedings; and a supplemental letter.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 February 2002 for a
period of four years.  She completed basic training and advanced individual
training and was awarded military occupational specialty 14E (Patriot Fire
Control Operator).  She was promoted to private first class.

2.  The applicant tested positive for cocaine on 16 December 2003.

3.  On 23 March 2004, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under
Article 15, UCMJ for wrongfully using cocaine between on or about 9
December 2003 and 16 December 2003.  Her punishment consisted of reduction
to the grade of E-1; forfeiture of $200.00 pay for 2 months; extra duty for
45 days; and restriction to the limits of the battery area, place of duty,
place of worship, dining facility, medical and dental facilities for 45
days.

4.  On 22 April 2004, the applicant’s unit commander notified her of
pending separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
paragraph 14-12c for commission of a serious offense.  The unit commander
cited the applicant's wrongful use of cocaine as the basis for his proposed
separation action.  The applicant was advised of her rights.

5.  On 22 April 2004, the unit commander recommended that the applicant be
separated from the United States Army prior to the expiration of her term
of service and issued a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The
unit commander stated he believed that if the applicant was allowed to
remain in the service, her poor performance would only continue causing her
to be a disruptive influence in this unit and the United States Army.

6.  On 23 April 2004, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and
submitted statements in her own behalf.  She stated that she made a mistake
and tried cocaine.  She came into the Army to fight for her country, to get
an education and to better herself.  She stated she has learned more about
herself through the discipline and values the Army tries to instill in its
Soldiers.  The Army has made her a Soldier and is a part of her.  This
chapter [action] has made her prioritize her life and look at her future.
She has continued her education online and has enrolled in the Army
Substance Abuse Program.  She also stated she was more than willing to do
anything it took to show that the Army was what she wanted and that a
second chance would not be wasted on her.  Even though she lost her
security clearance and may not be able to stay in Air Defense Artillery,
the Army and everything it embodies was the only place that feels right for
her.

7.  On 8 May 2004, the separation authority directed that the applicant be
discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12c
for commission of a serious offense with issuance of a general, under
honorable conditions discharge.

8.  The applicant was discharged from active duty on 12 May 2004 under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 12c(2).  She completed
2 years, 2 months and 23 days of active military service.  Her DD Form 214
shows she was issued a RE code of RE-4 and a Separation Program Designator
(SPD) of "JKK" (Misconduct).

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time,
set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
Chapter 14 established policy and prescribed procedures for separating
members for misconduct.   Soldiers were subject to discharge action for the
following:  paragraph 14-12a minor disciplinary infractions; paragraph 14-
12b a pattern of misconduct; or paragraph 14-12c commission of a serious
offense.  Paragraph 14-12c stated that abuse of illegal drugs was a serious
offense and separation action normally would be based upon commission of
serious misconduct.  First time offenders, grades E-1 through E-4 could be
processed for separation as appropriate.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, paragraph 1-16a stated
that commanders would ensure that adequate counseling and rehabilitative
measures were taken before initiating separation proceedings for the
following reasons:
(1) involuntary separation due to parenthood; (2) personality disorder; (3)
other designated physical or mental conditions; (4) entry-level performance
and conduct; (5) unsatisfactory performance (6) minor disciplinary
infractions or a pattern of misconduct; and (7) failure to meet body fat
standards.  Paragraph
1-16c stated that rehabilitative measures were required prior to initiating
separation proceedings for entry-level performance and conduct,
unsatisfactory performance, or minor disciplinary infractions/patterns of
misconduct.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 3 discusses character of service/
description of separation.

12.  Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4 discusses separation for expiration
of service obligation.

13.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes)
prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other
directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military
service, and the SPD codes to be used for these stated reasons.  The
regulation, in effect at the time, showed that the SPD code “JKK” as shown
on the applicant’s DD Form 214 specified the narrative reason for
separation as involuntary release or transfer for “Misconduct” and that the
authority for separation under this separation program designator was “AR
635-200, Chapter 14”.  Additionally, the SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table,
Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) established RE code 4 as the
proper reentry code to assign to Soldiers separated for this reason.

14.  Pertinent Army regulations provide that, prior to discharge or release
from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their
service records or the reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210
covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and
processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3
of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service
applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE
codes, including RA RE codes.  The regulation does not list RE-2 as a valid
RE code.

15.  RE code 4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service
and the disqualification is not waivable.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was discharged from active duty on 12 May 2004 under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(2) for misconduct.
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 1-16 does not require either counseling
or rehabilitation prior to initiating separation under paragraph 14-12c.

2.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows she was separated with a separation
code of "JKK" and was assigned an RE code of RE-4 in accordance with the
governing regulation in effect at the time.

3.  There is no evidence of record which shows the reentry code issued to
her was in error or unjust.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

SP______  MM______  AR______  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




                                  Shirley Powell________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050006221                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051213                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.0300                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021130

    Original file (20120021130.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 November 1989, the commanding general/separation authority approved the conditional waiver and ordered the applicant discharged from the Army under the provisions of chapter 14-12c of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct - abuse of illegal drugs with the issuance of an under honorable conditions discharge. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) she was issued confirms she was discharged for misconduct under the provisions of chapter 14, Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014741

    Original file (20080014741.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 January 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of chapter 14-12c of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel Separations) by reason of misconduct – illegal use of drugs. On 11 February 2004, the applicant was discharged after completing 1 year, 10 months, and 21 days of active military service during the period under review. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011686

    Original file (20100011686.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge. On 15 December 1997, the separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12c for commission of a serious offense and directed that the applicant receive a General Discharge Certificate. The DD Form 214 also shows her character of service was general, under honorable conditions; the separation authority was Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130003341

    Original file (AR20130003341.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 July 2008, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 26 August 2008, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, for misconduct (drug abuse), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK and an RE code of 4. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002183

    Original file (20110002183.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of her general discharge to honorable or amendment of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to delete the narrative reason for separation. The applicant states: * her narrative reason for separation (misconduct) hinders employment possibilities * the incident that led to her discharge happened many years ago and she should not be made to suffer her entire life because of the mistake she made over 20 years ago * her Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008819

    Original file (20100008819.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 April 1985, the separation authority waived counseling and rehabilitative requirements and directed the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct - drug abuse, with issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. It states, in pertinent part, that the SPD code of "JKK" (as shown on the applicant's DD Form 214) is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004222

    Original file (20070004222.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of her general discharge on 15 August 2006. The regulation shows that the separation program designator (SPD) "JKK", as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214, is appropriate for discharge when the narrative reason for discharge is "misconduct, commission of a serious offense, abuse of illegal drugs" and the authority for discharge under this SPD is "Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2)." The...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070014080

    Original file (20070014080.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 March 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070014080 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. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned reentry codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. The regulation shows that...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130005929

    Original file (AR20130005929.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 4 August 2005 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct, AR 635-200, 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 82d Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 16 September 2004, 3 years and 21 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 0 years, 10 months, 19 days h. Total Service: 0 years, 10 months, 19 days i. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes), in effect at...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001570

    Original file (20130001570.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 June 1993, she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of "Misconduct/Abuse of Illegal Drugs," with a general discharge. The available evidence shows a CID investigation found the applicant wrongfully possessed and distributed methamphetamine to a CID source. Her overall service record does not warrant an upgrade of her general discharge to an honorable discharge.