IN THE CASE OF:   Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	23 September 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130002457
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing her testimony, 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 her general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant provided no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		1 February 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions	
c. Date of Discharge:			13 July 2004
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct, 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			A Co, 44th Signal Bn, Mannheim, Germany	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	7 June 2001, 4 years	
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 1 month, 6 days
h. Total Service:			6 years, 10 months, 18 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (970826-010606), HD	
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	31L10, Cable Systems Installer
m. GT Score:				100
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Korea, Germany
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM-4, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, NPDR, 						ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		Yes	
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			29 June 2012, denied
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 August 1997.  On 7 June 2001, she reenlisted for a period of 4 years.  She was 21 years old at the time of her reenlistment and was a high school graduate.  She served in Korea and in Germany and had a total of 6 years, 10 months, and 18 days.  Her record indicates she received several awards including 4 AAMs and 2 AGCMs.  She was stationed in Mannheim, Germany when her discharge proceedings were initiated.



SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The record shows that on 4 June 2004, 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 serious offense, specifically for  wrongfully using cocaine.

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

3.  On 4 June 2004, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of her case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions and did not submit a statement on her 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 an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 26 June 2004, the separation authority approved the conditional waiver request, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 13 July 2004, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and a reentry code of 3.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  One counseling statement dated 23 February 2004, for testing positive for cocaine on a unit urinalysis.

2.  On 3 March 2004, the applicant accepted a Field Grade Article 15, for wrongfully using cocaine (031111-031121).  Her punishment consisted of reduction to the grade to E-4, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $946.00 per month for 2 months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction.

3.  A positive urinalysis dated 21 November 2003, coded IU (Unit Inspection), for cocaine.

4.  Two General Officer Memoranda of Reprimand dated 13 February 2004 and 23 March 2004, for driving while intoxicated, and testing positive for cocaine.

5.  Five Enlisted Evaluation Reports as follows:

	a. Period of 0105-0112, rated as Among the Best, 1/1
	b. Period of 0201-0203, rated as Among the Best, 2/1
	c. Period of 0204-0212, rated as Among the Best, 2/1
	d. Period of 0301-0308, rated as Fully Capable, 2/2
      e. Period of 0309-0403, rated as Marginal, 3/4

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided no supporting documents with her application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided by the applicant.

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 and her military records, 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 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.  The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a non-commissioned officer.  The applicant, as an NCO, 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.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15 for a serious violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and 2 GOMORs.

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 provided no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board.

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

6.  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: Personal Appearance  Date:  23 September 2013  Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes 

Counsel:  No

Witnesses/Observers: None 

DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE

1.  The applicant submitted the following additional documents:

	a. DA Form 638 – 1 page
	b. DD Form 214 – 1 page
	c. DA Form 4700 – 1 page
	d. Letter from Instructors – 1 page
	3. Letter from Aunt – 1 page

2.  The applicant presented no additional contentions.

In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing.

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 RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Change Authority for Separation:	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	UOTH - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20130002457		

Page 6 of 6 pages



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1