RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  19 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060014161 


	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.  


x

	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 his narrative reason for separation and Reentry (RE) Code be changed to a more favorable reason. 

2.  The applicant states that he desires his narrative reason for separation and RE Code be changed to a more favorable reason that will allow him to reenter the Army.  He further states that he understands that his offense was serious; however, based on his prior record of achievements, he believes that the Army can trust his sincerity to uphold the honor of a professional infantryman and he stills owes the Army for training him to be who he is today.  He also requests that he be given this chance to regain his honor and give back what he owes the Army.   

3.  The applicant provides copies of orders awarding him decorations and skill badges and copies of some of his evaluation reports. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  He enlisted in the Regular Army in Atlanta, Georgia on 3 March 1988 for a period of 4 years under the infantry training option.  He completed his training and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 December 1992 and to the pay grade of E-6 on 1 October 1995.  

2.  In November 1997, while assigned to Panama, the applicant attended and completed the Unit Alcohol and Drug Prevention course and was assigned additional duties as the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Noncommissioned Officer (NCO).  In 1998, while assigned as an instructor at the NCO Academy at Fort Benning, he was also assigned the additional duties of Alcohol and Drug Coordinator.  

3.  On 19 October 1999, the applicant submitted a urine sample that subsequently tested positive for cocaine.  The applicant was advised of his rights on 4 November 1999 and he elected to exercise his rights and remain silent.  On 17 November 1999, he was advised that nonjudicial punishment (NJP) would be imposed against him and that separation proceedings would be initiated.     

4.  Although the record of NJP (DA Form 2627) is not present in the available records, it appears that NJP was imposed against him on 16 December 1999 and resulted in his being reduced to the pay grade of E-5.

5.  On 13 January 2000, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct – commission of a serious offense.  He cited the applicant’s wrongful use of cocaine as the basis for his recommendation. 

6.  After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived all of his rights and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

7.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 7 February 2000 and directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate. 

8.  Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 15 February 2000, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14 for misconduct.  He had served 11 years, 11 months and 13 days of total active service and was given a RE Code of “4”.

9.  He applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 15 November 2003 requesting that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable based on his overall record of service.  He was granted a personal appearance before the ADRB Traveling Panel in Los Angeles, California on 26 February 2004 and that board voted to upgrade his discharge to honorable but determined that the narrative reason for separation was proper and equitable.  Accordingly, his discharge was changed to honorable and the narrative reason for separation remained as misconduct.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and procedures for separating personnel for misconduct.  Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, commission of a serious offense, and drug abuse.  Although an honorable or general is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

11.  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 reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the USAR.  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.
12.  RE-4 indicates that a person is not qualified for continued Army service by virtue of being separated from the service with a nonwaivable disqualification.  The applicable regulations direct that an RE Code of 4 be issued for a SPD of “JKK”, which indicates separation for misconduct – drug abuse.   

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  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.

2.  Notwithstanding the actions of the ADRB, his discharge appropriately characterizes his record of service.
 
3.  The applicant’s contention that his narrative reason for separation and RE Code should be changed because of his prior record of service and achievements and because he believes that the Army can trust his sincerity to uphold the honor of a professional infantryman has been noted and found to lack merit.

4.  The applicant’s record of service and achievements had not changed when he tested positive for cocaine.  He was serving in the pay grade of E-6 at the time he violated the trust placed in him as an NCO and as the unit drug and alcohol coordinator.  Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to justify a different narrative reason for separation and RE Code.

5.  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.    

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x__  __x __  _x___  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.





____x________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060014161
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070419
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(GD)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
2000/02/15
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200/CH14. . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON
MISCONDUCT
BOARD DECISION
(DENY)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.110.0200
191/RSN/AUTH
2.100.0300
4/RE CODE
3.

4.

5.

6.