IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:  	3 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120021644
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

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 was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.




      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident with over 28 months of service and no other adverse action.  He was a good Soldier that made a bad decision.  This is the only time that he received an Article 15.  As a Soldier in the Army, he had high standards and morals.  He doesn’t think a one incident should determine who he is or his future.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		19 November 2012	
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			6 November 2012	
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 							paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3	
e. Unit of Assignment:			D Company, 526th Brigade Support Battalion 							(Rear)(Provisional), 101st Airborne Division (Air 						Assault), Fort Campbell, KY	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	5 May 2010, 3 years and 23 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 6 months, 2 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 6 months, 2 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist
m. GT Score:				97
n. Education:				HS Grad	
o. Overseas Service:			Korea
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No	
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No


SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 May 2010, for a period of 3 years and 23 weeks.  He was 25 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He was serving at Fort Campbell, KY when his discharge was initiated.  He had no special awards or meritorious achievements.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 19 September 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for wrongfully possessed synthetic cannabinoids misconduct (120919).

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  The applicant's election of rights is not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  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.  

4.  On 16 October 2012, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 6 November 2012, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKQ, and an RE code of 3.               

6.  The applicant’s record contains no AWOL or lost time.  

7.  The record contains a CID Report, dated 7 June 2012, pertaining to the incident.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  The record does not contain any urinalysis reports.

2.  One negative counseling statement dated 6 June 2012, for possession of a controlled substance.  

3.  The record contains a Field Grade Article 15 dated 9 July 2012, for wrongfully possessing synthetic cannabinoids (120602).  The punishment imposed consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $835.00 pay per month for two months, suspended, 45 days restriction and extra duty, and an oral reprimand.


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293; a DD Form 214, and a memorandum, dated 11 November, 2012, from his commander stating that he had no negative urinalysis for 19 January 2012 or 10 July 2012.   

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 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 being absent 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.   

2.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

4.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies the SPD code of "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for misconduct (serious offense).

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3.



DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 
 
2.  The record confirms 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.  It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess illegal drugs (synthetic cannabinoids), 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 possessing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge.

3.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  

4.  The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident with over 28 months of service and no other adverse action.  Although 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 there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  

5.  The applicant also contends that he was a good Soldier that made a bad decision and one incident should not determine who he is or his future.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge.  

6.  A review of the service record does not reveal any evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the applicant’s command.  It appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.   

7.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

8.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review    Date:  3 May 2013          Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  N/A

Counsel:  [ yes ] redacted

Witnesses/Observers: N/A

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	N/A
Change RE Code to:		N/A
Grade Restoration to:		N/A
Other:					N/A

















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	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20120021644



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1