Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2011/10/31	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, he requests his discharge to be upgraded to honorable and change the separation and RE Code.  He was never given a chance to be rehabilitated.  He believes that this was wrong because he has been rehabilitated through the VA hospital.  He was a good Soldier. 

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: 051202
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 051228   Chapter: 14-12c       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Serious Offense)	   RE:     SPD: JKQ   Unit/Location: HHC, 4th Brigade, APO AE 09177 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050810, wrongfully used Tetrahydorcannabinol (THC) and Methylenedioxy-N-Methylamphetamine, Ecstasy (050406-050506), reduction to E-1, forfeiture of &600.00 x 2, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  23
Current ENL Date: 041117    Current ENL Term: 06 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 11 Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 10 Mos, 02 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-020227-041116/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92F10 Petroleum Supply Specialist   GT: 102   EDU: GED   Overseas: Germany, SWA   Combat: Iraq (040209-0502205)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: Receiving treatment through VA.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 17 November 2005, 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 commission of a serious offense for wrongfully using marijuana (050406-050506), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 30 November 2005, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted a statement in his own 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 of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 15 December 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

       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.   

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable.  
       
       The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his 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 service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  
       
             The applicant requests his discharge to be upgraded to honorable and change the separation and RE Code.    However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)", and the separation code is "JKQ."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  

       Moreover, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry (RE) codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  The applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  The analyst found no bases upon which to recommend a change to the applicant’s reason for discharge.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.
       
             Furthermore, the applicant contends he was never given a chance to be rehabilitated and he believes that this was wrong because he has been rehabilitated through the VA hospital.  He was a good Soldier.  However, AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements states that the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier.  Further, AR 600-85, paragraph 3-8 entitled self referrals; states that the applicant could have self referred himself to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) counseling center for assistance.  Additionally, the analyst acknowledges the applicant’s in-service accomplishments and considered the quality of his service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade.  

            Further, the analyst noted the Polysubstance Dependence diagnosis from the Veterans Administration.  However, in review of the applicant's entire service record, the analyst found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  The record shows that on 22 August 2005, the applicant underwent a mental evaluation which indicates that he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  The analyst concluded that just because the applicant suffers from PTSD does not mean he doesn't know the difference between right and wrong or that he did not have control over his behavior.  There are many Soldiers with the same condition that complete their service successfully.
       
       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: 11 May 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293; DD Form 214; a character reference letter, dated 22 August 2010; and documents from the Department of Veterans Affairs New York Harbor Health Care Systems

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.





























  
        
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: NA
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 AR20110021839
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages