IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:	23 April 2014

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130013564
___________________________________________________________________________

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 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 pertinent part and in effect, he is truly grateful and humble for what the Army, its values and the experience have done for him and if possible, he would do it all over again.  He hopes to share the valued lessons the Army taught him with his family.  Secondly, he has a son and a wife to provide for but his background and discharge has hindered few employers from hiring and giving him a chance.  An upgrade would benefit him and his family.  He has matured and moved on, and most importantly, he has learned from his past mistakes and does not want it to haunt him for the rest of his life.  He is not the same person, he was a year ago.  He would like a chance to prove that, on the civilian side.  He is a young hard worker with strong work ethics and will continue to carry himself in a professional manner.  He plans on going back to school and starting his career.  He feels the characterization of his discharge is incorrect—the stated misconduct (drug abuse) is a bit harsh because he took multiple urinalyses prior to and after the one he failed and passed them, and to say that he abused drugs when he failed only one urinalysis is a bit harsh.  It has tainted how his employers, etc., views him.  An upgrade and changing the reason for his separation would provide him more opportunities to prosper as he has made fair progress.  With theses changes, he will continue to strive for the best. 

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	22 July 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	22 May 2012
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Paragraph 
			14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4
	e.	Unit of assignment:	77th FA Regiment, 2nd Strike BN, 4ID, Fort Carson, CO
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	8 June 2010, 3 years, 21 weeks
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 11 months, 15 days
	h.	Total Service:	1 year, 11 months, 15 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-3
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	13R10, Field Artillery Firefinder Radar Operator
	m.	GT Score:	NIF
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	None
	p.	Combat Service:	None
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR
	r.	Administrative Separation Board: 	No
	s.	Performance Ratings:	None
	t.	Counseling Statements:	NIF
	u.	Prior Board Review:	No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:  

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 June 2010, for a period of 3 years and 21 weeks.  He was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13R10, Field Artillery Firefinder Radar Operator.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  He completed 1 year, 11 months, and 15 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  

2.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 22 May 2012, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, for misconduct (drug abuse), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKK and a reentry (RE) code of 4.  

3.  The applicant’s available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost.  

4.  On 15 May 2012, DA, Installation Management Commander, Headquarters, USAG, Fort Carson, Fort Carson, CO, Orders Number 136-0008, discharged the applicant from the Army, effective 22 May 2012.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

There are no counseling statements or UCMJ actions in the available record.  He was separated as a PV1/E-1 and the action that caused his reduction from SPC/E-4 is not part of his AMHRR.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided none.

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 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 "JKK" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c(2), misconduct (drug abuse).

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKK" 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.  However, after examining the applicant’s available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process.  

3.  The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, for misconduct (drug abuse), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his characterization to honorable and contends he regrets his actions and has learned from his past mistakes.  However, by regulation, a UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct.  It appears the applicant’s generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normally appropriate UOTHC discharge.  It appears his misconduct diminished his overall record of service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  

5.  The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career.  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.  The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  

6.  The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the incident that led to his discharge.  The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

7.  The applicant expressed being grateful for his Army experience and if possible, he would do it all over again.  He also expressed a desire to returning to school and starting his career, perhaps to have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill.  However, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4.  An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is not eligible to reenlist.  Additionally, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

8.  The applicant's contends that the characterization of his discharge is incorrect and the narrative reason stating misconduct (drug abuse) is a bit harsh because he failed only one urinalysis, after he passed multiple urinalysis prior to and after the one he failed.  His contentions were carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge.  

9.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record.

10.  Regarding the applicant’s request to change the narrative reason for the discharge, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)," and the separation code is "JKK."  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.  

11.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief.



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  23 April 2014       Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

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:	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)		AR20130013564

Page 7 of 7 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1