Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2012/01/23	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, the narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214 is incorrect and states "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)."  He failed one urinalysis due to a one time cocaine use.  The definition of drug abuse is the habitual use of an addictive illegal drug.  He was two weeks shy of completing his 45 day Field Grade Article 
15 punishment and had no trouble since.  He was discharged after already being punished.  As part of his punishment, he had a two day rehabilitation class in which he completed successfully. 

It is his opinion that his discharge was improper and inequitable in accordance with Giles V. Secretary of the Army 
(Civil Action No. 77—0904).  It was improper due to false or misleading documents for the discharge board.  A one time incident being used for discharge is inequitable.  This has and will cause a life-time of difficulty in obtaining gainful employment.  Also, he would like the chance to reenlist and serve his country.

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: 080117
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080131   Chapter: 14-12c (2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: Bravo Battery., 2nd Battalion, 18th Field Artillery Regiment, Fort Sill, OK. 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 071227, wrongfully used cocaine, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, 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:  18
Current ENL Date: 070214    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 11 Mos, 17 Days ?????
Total Service:  		00 Yrs, 11 Mos, 17 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13P10 MLRS Fire Direction Specialist   GT: 98   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed by the applicant.





VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 11 January 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c (2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct—for wrongfully using cocaine, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  
       
       On 15 January 2008, 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 23 January 2008, 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 contends the narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214 is incorrect and states "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)."  He failed one urinalysis due to a one time cocaine use.  Further, he contends the definition of drug abuse is the habitual use of an addictive illegal drug.  However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), 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 (Drug Abuse)", and the separation code is "JKK."  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.  

             Furthermore, the applicant expresses that this was one time incident.  It is inequitable and has and will cause a life-time of difficulty in obtaining gainful employment.  The analyst noted that even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 
       
             Further, the applicant contends that his discharge was improper due to false or misleading documents for the discharge board.  However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence or documentation to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged.  The applicant’s statement alone does not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity in this case.  

             Lastly, the applicant claims his discharge has and will cause a life-time of difficulty in obtaining gainful employment.  Also, he would like the chance to reenlist and serve his country.  However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  At the time of discharge, the applicant was assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3” but should have been "4."  Furthermore, an RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  Additionally, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

             Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the analyst determined that the applicant was incorrectly assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3”.  Therefore, the analyst recommends the reentry eligibility code be administratively changed to RE-4.  Except for the foregoing modification to the applicant's reentry eligibility (RE) code, the analyst found that 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 July 2012         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293; DD Form 214; an Army Substance Abuse Program memorandum, dated 16 June 2008; an Election of Rights memorandum, dated 15 January 2008; and the Commander's Recommendation memorandum.
















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.  However, 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 27, Reentry Code as RE-3.  In view of the error, the Board directed that an administrative change be made to block 27, Reentry Code to read RE-4.  Except for the foregoing modification, the Board determined that 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: NA
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
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 AR20120002303
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 4 pages