Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 2012/11/19	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that she requests a change to the narrative reason for separation.  She contends she had personal issues and was being harassed by males in her unit.  She further contends that her discharge is interfering with her future goals. 

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: 080304
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080402   Chapter: 14-12c(2)       AR: 635-200
Reason: Misconduct (Drug Abuse)	   RE:     SPD: JKK   Unit/Location: 126th Transportation Company, Rear Detachment, Fort Bragg, NC  

Time Lost: AWOL for 119 days (070724-071119), returned to unit. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080128, wrongfully used marijuana (071022-071121); and without authority, absented herself from her unit (AWOL) (070724-071120); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $650 pay x 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:  20
Current ENL Date: 070125    Current ENL Term: 04  Years  18 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 	00  Yrs, 10  Mos, 12  Days ?????
Total Service:  		01 Yrs,  00  Mos, 11  Days block 12e on the applicant's DD Form 214 total prior inactive service, is incorrect and should read 00 Yrs, 01 Mos, 29 Days.
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG-060915-061113/UNC
Highest Grade: E-2		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88M10 Motor Transport Operator   GT: 99   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated she earned a Bachelor’s Degree in Biology and applied to graduate school for her Master’s Degree while working full-time.

  

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 4 March 2008, 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-commission of a serious offense for testing positive for marijuana (071121); and being a deserter until (071120), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.
       
       On 4 March 2008, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 
       
       On 13 March 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 a careful review of all the applicant’s military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and document submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.
       
       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 below that meriting an honorable discharge.
       
       Although the applicant did not properly annotate the online application requesting a review of her record for a possible upgrade of her discharge; she was given the benefit of this review as instructed in pertinent part (E.3.1.3.2) by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge.
       
       
       
       
       The applicant requested a change to the narrative reason for separation.  The narrative reason for separation is governed by specific directives.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)", the separation code is "JKK", and the reentry eligibility (RE) code is RE 4.  
       
       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, separation code, entered in block 26, and RE Code, entered in block 27 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.  
       
       The applicant contends she had personal issues and was being harassed by some males in her unit.  The record of evidence does not demonstrate that she sought relief through her command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community Community Counseling Center, and other  resources available to all Soldiers.
       
       Further, although the applicant alleges she was a victim of harassment during her military service, there is no evidence in her military records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence supporting this contention.  Therefore, this argument is not sufficient to support her request for an upgrade of his discharge.
       
       The applicant also contends that her discharge is interfering with her future goals. The Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service  were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted that the DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document-Drug Testing) found in the applicant's official record shows that the test was coded CO which indicates "Competence for Duty/Command Direct/Fitness for duty.”  The Limited Use Policy applies to this test basis, per AR 600-85.  However, the evidence of record  also shows the applicant absented herself from her unit (AWOL) (070724-071120).  The DD Form 2624 was dated 21 November 2007, the day after she retuned from AWOL.  In all likelihood the unit commander had a policy to test Soldiers after returning from AWOL, and leave, etc.        
       
       The unit commander ordered the applicant to provide a urine sample based on his drug policy.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel, who would have informed her if the Limited Use Policy applied.  In view of the aforementioned, the analyst determined that the code on the DD Form 2624 was in all likelihood incorrect and should have been coded IO for “Inspection Other” instead of CO for “Competence for Duty.”  The analyst concluded that the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error on file in this case.  The evidence did not create a substantial doubt that the discharge would have been any different if the error had not been made.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 	Date: 1 April 2013         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: Online application, dated (121110); and a DD Form 214, dated (080402).

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 Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
   



































IX.  Board Decision						
Board Vote:
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 1    No change 4
(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: None

XI.  Certification Signature
Approval Authority:




ARCHIE L. DAVIS III
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board




JOSEPH M. BYERS
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
Secretary Recorder
?????










Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTH - Under Other Than Honorable 
												Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20120021516
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages