IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:	21 February 2014

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130012080
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the Discussion and Recommendation that follows, the Board noted that the government introduced a document into the discharge process that is limited use evidence.  This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of an honorable discharge.  Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to honorable.  However, the Board found the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and voted not to change it.  




      
      
      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 to upgrade the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable and to change the narrative reason for his discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he believes his discharge is inequitable comparing to his overall performance and based on an isolated incident in the six years and ten months of his active duty service, which a large part of his behavioral issues was the contributing factor.  He saw behavioral healthcare providers post deployment for a short period because of training events, schools, and receiving no diagnosis of major depression and adjustment disorder until a year later.  He was prescribed numerous psychiatric medications by physician’s assistants and none of the medication worked.  However, once he was hospitalized, a civilian doctor was able to stabilize his behavioral health.  He provided Fort Sill documents from the psychiatrist regarding the underlying issue of the major depression as a major contributing issue.  He was also pending a divorce during the stressful period.  He has never received an Article 15 or any negative counselings until the incident that led to his discharge.  He was an outstanding Soldier and feels the characterization of his service is deemed honorable. He would also like the reentry code changed to a waiverable code for future service in the Army or the National Guard.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	27 June 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	30 May 2013
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Drug Rehabilitation Failure, AR 635-200, Chapter 9 
			JPC, RE-4
	e.	Unit of assignment:	Btry B, 1st Bn,-31st FA, 434th FA Bde, Fort Sill, OK
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	20 September 2008, 5 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	4 years, 8 months, 11 days
	h.	Total Service:	6 years, 10 months, 5 days 
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	RA (060726-070124)/HD
			RA (070125-080919)/HD
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-6
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	11B20, Infantryman
	m.	GT Score:	120
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	SWA
	p.	Combat Service:	Afghanistan (110611-111220), Iraq (071210-090217) 
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	ARCOM-3; AAM-4; AGCM-2; NDSM; ACM-2CS 
			ICM-CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR; NATO MDL; CIB 
			CAB
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	Waived
	s.	Performance Ratings:	Yes
	t.	Counseling Statements:	Yes
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:  

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 July 2006, and reenlisted twice, the latter reenlistment was on 20 September 2008, for a period of 5 years.  He was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served in Afghanistan and Iraq.  He earned three ARCOMs and four AAMs.  He completed 6 years, 10 months, and 5 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record indicates that on 28 February 2013, the applicant was command referred to ASAP and while in treatment, the applicant tested positive on a subsequent urinalysis (130327).  The record further reflects he was sent to a rehab hospital on 29 March 2013.  

2.  On 17 April 2013, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure.  

3.  On 30 April 2013, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of drug rehabilitation failure, specifically for testing positive for D-methamphetamines and D-amphetamines on a unit urinalysis (121219); receiving a field grade Article 15 for the misconduct; testing positive for methamphetamines (130327),while being enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) and during a routine rehabilitation urinalysis test; and in consultation with the rehabilitation team, it was determined that further rehabilitative efforts are not practicable, rendering him a rehabilitation failure. 

4.  The unit commander advised the applicant of his rights and recommended a discharge from the Army with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions and waiver of any rehabilitation measures.

5.  On 7 May 2013, although the applicant waived legal counsel, the record reflects he consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his 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 his behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

6.  On 15 May 2013, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 

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

8.  The applicant was separated on 30 May 2013, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for drug rehabilitation failure, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JPC and a reentry code of 4.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Evidence of improper use of amphetamines to include:

      a.  RO-coded urinalysis dated 27 March 2013 with a positive result for d-amphetamine and d-methamphetamine.
      b.  IR-coded urinalysis dated 19 December 2012 with a positive result for the same substances.
      c.  Medical Record Consultation Sheets dated 7 January 2013 and 16 April 2013 requesting a medical review as required by AR 600-85, Legitimacy of Use.
      d.  A CID report dated 17 January 2013 naming the applicant as the subject of an investigation into the wrongful use of methamphetamine.
      e.  Negative counseling statements for wrongful use of methamphetamine. 
      f.  An Article 15 dated 29 January 2013 for d-amphetamine and methamphetamine use.
      g.  A 20 March Report of Mental Status Evaluation citing an Axis I diagnosis of 305.70, Amphetamine Abuse.

2.  Documents pertaining to enrollment in the Army Substance Abuse Program to include a 14 January 2013 Confirmed Positive Urinalysis Specimen Memorandum, a 16 April 2013 Confirmed Positive Urinalysis Specimen memorandum, a 17 April 2013 memorandum designating him an ASAP Rehabilitative Failure; and, a 26 April 2013 follow-up memorandum from the Fort Sill ASAP Clinical Program Manager.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an ERB; five NCOERs for periods (120929-130201, 091201-100928, 100929-110928, 090801-091130, 080801-090731); five memorandas notifying the applicant of his discharge, dated 30 April 2013 and the separation authority’s decision, dated 15 May 2013; AFCT Results, dated 12 April 2012; six certificates of achievements for outstanding APFT; promotion board performances and WLC leadership award; certificate of training excellence; DA Form 1059, Service School Academic Evaluation Report, dated 11 August 2009; DA Form 3349, Physical Profile, dated 24 May 2013; and health records.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant provided none.  



REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse.  

2.  A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for alcohol or drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical.  

3.  Army policy states that an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service.  However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process.

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 "JPC" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for drug rehabilitation failure.

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JPC" will be assigned an RE Code of 4.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  

2.  After examining the applicant’s military records, and the issues and documents submitted with the application, it appears the characterization of the applicant’s discharge was improper.

3.  The record confirms that the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test, dated 27 March 2013, coded RO (Rehabilitation), which was part of the applicant’s Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan.  This is limited use information as defined in Chapter 6, AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of an honorable characterization of service.  

4.  The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed because his separation was inequitable.  However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Drug Rehabilitation Failure," and the separation code is "JPC."  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 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be 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.  Moreover, the applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service.  However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 4.  An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.

5.  The record shows the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were not followed in this case.

6.  Therefore, the characterization not being proper and equitable, recommend the Board grant full relief by upgrading the characterization of service to fully honorable.  However, the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. 

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review     Date:  21 February 2014     Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  4	No Change:  1
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:	Honorable
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
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)		AR20130012080

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1