IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:	25 April 2014

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130014332
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge that was based on a one-time drug use and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  This action entails restoration of grade to E-4/SPC.




      
      
      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 under other than honorable to general, under honorable conditions or honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he did not receive the help he needed in the Army and cannot get the help that he needs now.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	5 August 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	17 December 2004
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, AR 635-200, 
			Chapter 10, KFS, RE-4
	e.	Unit of assignment:	HHT, 3rd Sqdn, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 2BCT, Fort 
			Stewart, GA 
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	13 July 2000, 4 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	4 years, 5 months, 5 days
	h.	Total Service:	4 years, 5 months, 5 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	None
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-4
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	42A10, Human Resource Specialist
	m.	GT Score:	94
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	None
	p.	Combat Service:	None
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	AAM; AGCM; NDSM; GWOTSM; NPDR; 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 13 July 2000, for a period of 4 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 42A10, Human Resource Specialist.  He earned an AAM.  He completed 4 years, 5 months, and 5 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates that on 4 August 2004, the applicant was charged with wrongfully using marijuana.

2.  On 9 November 2004, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense.  The applicant indicated he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits.  The applicant submitted a statement on his own behalf.  The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended disapproval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

3.  On 24 November 2004, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 

4.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 17 December 2004, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant’s record of service does not show any record of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  There is a positive urinalysis report contained in the record that was collected on 19 July 2004, based on inspection, unit (sweep).  A second report, entitled “Multiple Positives Report,” dated 2 August 2004, indicates an additional positive urinalysis that was collected on 24 October 2001, based on inspection, random sample.

2.  CID Report, dated 17 August 2004, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for wrongful use of marijuana. 

3.  DA Form 1059, Service School Academic Evaluation Report, dated 25 September 2003, indicates the applicant achieved the course standards of the Primary Leadership Development

4.  There are no negative counseling statements or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided no further evidence.

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 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  

2.  Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  

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 and the issue submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  It also shows that after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

3.  The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance.  His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date.  

4.  The applicant contends he never received the help he needed in the Army and cannot get the help that he needs now.  However, AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier.  Further, AR 600-85, paragraph 3-8 entitled self-referrals, states the applicant could have self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) counseling center for assistance.  

5.  Therefore, the reason and characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief.




Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge that was based on a one-time drug use and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  This action entails restoration of grade to E-4/SPC.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  25 April 2014       Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  5	No Change:  0
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:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		SPC/E-4
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)		AR20130014332

Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1