IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	31 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130001546
___________________________________________________________________________

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.  
      
2.  Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board noted an administrative error on the applicant's DD Form 214 and directed a change to block 27, reentry code to 4 as approved by the separation authority:
      
     


      
      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 discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he deployed to combat and learned his spouse was unfaithful.  Being stressed from combat and his wife, he used drugs.  He served in combat and feels he deserves an upgrade.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		22 January 2013
b. Discharge Received:		Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			18 May 2005
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct , AR 635-200, 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			HHC, CONUS Replacement Center (CRC), 							Fort Benning, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	OAD/2 January 2004, years 
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 4 months, 17 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 1 month, 20 days/block 12e on the DD Form 						214 total prior inactive service is incorrect and should 						read 1 year, 5 months, 3 days. 
i. Time Lost:				None 
j. Previous Discharges:		ARNG- (000814-000814)/UNC 									       (Break-In Service)										USAR-(020729-040101)/NA
     (Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	21K10, Plumber
m. GT Score:				104
n. Education:				GED Certificate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Afghanistan (040325-040704)
q. Decorations/Awards:		AFRM-W/”M” DEV, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		No
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Army National Guard on 14 August 2000 and was discharged on 14 August 2000, with an uncharacterized discharge.  The record also shows he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve 29 July 2002 for 8 years.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry and had a GED Certificate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 21K10, Plumber.  He was serving at Fort Benning, GA, when his discharge was initiated.  His record further shows he served a tour in combat and earned an AFRM-W/”M” DEV.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 29 March 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, specifically for the following offense of being convicted by a Summary Court-Martial.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge and advised him of his rights.

3.  In a pre-trial agreement, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and offered to plead guilty to the Summary Court-Martial charges and accept an under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC) and to waive his right to demand a separation board.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate and senior commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 21 April 2005, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

5.  The applicant’s record shows as part of his Summary Court Martial punishment, he was confined for ten days; however, this lost time was not annotated on the DD Form 214 block 29, dates of time lost during this period.

6.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 18 May 2005, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK, and a RE code of 3.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  There is a Summary Court-Martial dated 29 March 2005, for wrongfully using marijuana (050106); wrongfully using hashish (040401-040627); wrongfully using anabolic steroids (040401-040627); and wrongfully stealing a pack of cigarettes, a value of about $2.75, the property of Army and Air Force Exchange (AAFES), (041027); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $461 pay x 1 month and confinement for ten days.

2.  The record contains a confinement order dated, 29 March 2005.

3.  The record does not contain any counseling statements.


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293; three handwritten support statements; and a DD Form 214. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any.

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 his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the issues and documents 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 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 his service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by a Summary Court-Martial 15 for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

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 he deployed to combat and learned his spouse was unfaithful.  Being stressed from combat and his wife, he used drugs.  However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.  

5.  The applicant further contends he served in combat and feels he deserves an upgrade.  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 under review.

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

7.  The review of the applicant’s service record revealed that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code as “3.”  Therefore and as approved by the separation authority, recommend an adminsitrative correction to block 27, RE code to “4,” as approved by the separation authority.

8.  Except for the modification as stated above, the discharge was found proper and equitable, thus, recommend the Board deny relief.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review	Date:  	31 May 2013            Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify:  No

Counsel:  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:			Yes
Change Characterization to:		No Change
Change Reason to:				No Change
Change Authority for Separation:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			4
Grade Restoration to:			NA
Other:						NA
		





























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)		AR20130001546



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1