Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/07/21	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she was injured during training and was also having family difficulties.  The day before returning from convalescent leave her grandfather past away.  While at home she also filed for divorce.  She was young and immature and did not know how to deal with stress.  She requests an upgrade of her discharge to honorable.

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: 011019
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 011031   Chapter: 14-12c(1)    AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: JKD   Unit/Location: FTC, 120th AG Bn, Fort Jackson, SC 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 011015, wrongfully used marijuana (010728-010828), forfeiture of $243 for two months, 14 days of extra duty and restriction (FG)

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 010510    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 05 Mos, 20 Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 05 Mos, 10 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Queen Creek, AZ
Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states she obtained two college degrees and has been working at the Superior Court of Arizona for five years.  

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 19 October 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs, for wrongfully using marijuana (010728-010828), with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service.  
       
       On an undated document, the applicant waived her right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on her behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an uncharacterized discharge.  
       
       On 26 October 2001, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s separation from the Army with an uncharacterized discharge.

       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.   The regulation requires an uncharacterized discharge for individuals that are in entry level status.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of the applicant’s military records, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst noted from the evidence of record that the applicant received an uncharacterized separation while in an entry-level status (ELS).  
       
       The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier.  The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies.  By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of her service.  
       
       The applicant contends that she was immature, had family issues, and since leaving the Army has obtained two college degrees and works at the Superior Court in the State of Arizona.  However, the record indicates that the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge with the description of service as uncharacterized because the applicant was in fact in entry level status.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides in pertinent part, that a Soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty.  The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the Soldier a probationary period.  Soldiers who are found to lack the necessary motivation, adaptability, self-discipline, ability, or attitude to become productive Soldiers may be expeditiously separated while in entry-level status.  Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when the separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status.    
       
       Moreover, the analyst noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.  Further, the applicant contends she is entitled to an upgrade of her discharge because of mitigating circumstances which contributed to the misconduct.  Specifically, she claims stress caused by family issues at home resulted in her discharge.  While the applicant may believe this stress at home was the underlying cause of her misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that she sought relief from this stress through her command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, she has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for her misconduct.
       
       Finally, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.
       
       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: 24 February 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: Vicente A. Sanchez, 5636 E. McDowell Rd., Bldg M5710, Phoenix, AZ 85008

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Birth certificate, court documents, eleven character reference letters, college degree, and other certificates, DD Form 214, discharge packet.

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.   Moreover and notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as “AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(1),” and block 26, separation code  as "JKD ."  In view of these errors the Board directed that an administrative change be made to block 25 to read separation authority as “AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(2),” and block 26, separation code to read "JKK," as approved by the separation authority.  Except for the foregoing modifications the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable. 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)

X.  Board Action Directed
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: 
Change Reason to: No change
Other: Change the separation authority to AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) with corresponding SPD Code of JKK.
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:

EDGAR J. YANGER
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board



BONITA E. TROTMAN
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder

Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20110015161
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages