IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms.

      BOARD DATE:  	17 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120022557
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

1.  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 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 to her discharge from general, under honorable conditions to an honorable characterization of service.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she admits to being wrong for not informing her chain of command when she initially found out about what was going on in her quarters.  She realizes that she could have handled the situation better if given another chance.  She is not trying to make excuses for the events that happened. She has realized the errors of the choices that she made. She has learned from her mistakes and would like a second chance to reach her full potential.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			4 December 2012			
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions	
c. Date of Discharge:				11 November 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Pattern of Misconduct, 14-12b, JKA, 3
e. Unit of assignment:				HQ & HQ CO, Heidelberg Medical Activity,							Heidelberg, GE
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		9 May 2008, 3 years	
g. Current Enlistment Service:		2 years, 6 months, 2 days
h. Total Service:				4 years, 8 months, 14 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			RA 060228 – 080508/HD	
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		68J10 Medical Logistics Specialist
m. GT Score:					111
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				Germany
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, 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 reenlisted in the Regular Army on 9 May 2008, for a period of 3 years.  She was      20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  She served in Germany and completed 4 years, 8 months, and 14 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 29 September 2010, the commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, Commission of a Serious Offense;    specifically for:

a. allowing her husband to deal marijuana from her on-post government quarters and  
    allowing her husband and others to use marijuana in the quarters (090203 – 100203);
	b. failing to report to her appointed place of duty at the prescribed time (100326);
	c. failing to pay for her gas (100329).

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the commander recommended a general under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 1 October 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted 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.  

4.  The separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 11 November 2010, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA, and an RE code of 3. 

6.  The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  An Article 15, dated 29 June 2010, wrongfully possessed marijuana, a controlled substance (090203 – 100203); without authority, failed to at the prescribed time to her appointed place of duty (100326).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $723 per month for 2 months, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (101226), extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

2.  Four negative counseling statements dated between 25 November 2009 and 12 July 2010 for being recommended for discharge, being suspected of fraud, theft and larceny, failing to pay a just debt, and failing to be at her assigned place of duty at the correct time.
      
3.  A CID Report of Investigation (Joint) dated 7 June 2010, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for wrongful possession of marijuana.  


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

 The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant provided no information concerning her post service accomplishments or activities.

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.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  However, the service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered the reason for separation as pattern of misconduct, authority as AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, and SPD code of JKA.  However, the separation authority approved the discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (serious offense).
3.  Therefore, the characterization of service being both, proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief.  However, recommend the Board make the following changes:  
      
      a. change block 25, separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c
      b. change block 26, separation code to JKQ
      c. change block 28, narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Serious Offense)    

4.  The record confirms 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.  It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  By her misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality her service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15 for violating the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

5.  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.  

6.  The applicant admits to being wrong for not informing her chain of command when she initially found out about what was going on in her quarters.  She realizes that she could have handled the situation better if given another chance.  She has learned from her mistakes and would like a second chance to reach her full potential.  Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on AR 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3.  There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 
 
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: Record Review	  Date: 17 April 2013       Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify? No	 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

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)		AR20120022557

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1