IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	2 May 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130015411
___________________________________________________________________________

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 an upgrade of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was under the influence and did not receive any real help with his problem, which was not his fault.  It has been thirteen years since his discharge and for eight years he has not been in any trouble.  He needs a better paying job for his family, his family’s military name and his country.  He was not given a fair chance to recover.  He desires to come back into the Army.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date: 		19 August 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			19 September 2002
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 						14-12c(1), JKF, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			Service Battery, 1-17th Field Artillery, Fort Sill, OK
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	29 August 2000, 3 years/(block 12a on the applicant’s 					DD Form 214 date entered active duty this period, is 						incorrect and should read (000829), see enlistment 						contract).
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 5 months, 19 days
h. Total Service:			1 year, 5 months, 19 days
i. Time Lost:				63 days
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist
m. GT Score:				98
n. Education:				GED Certificate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 August 2000, for a period of 3 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry with a GED Certificate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist.  His record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements; and he achieved the rank of PV2/E-2.  He was serving at Fort Sill, OK when his discharge was initiated.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 27 March 2002, 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 a serious offense.  Specifically for the following offenses:

     a.  being absent without leave, and

     b.  wrongfully using marijuana.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 2 April 2002, the applicant consulted with legal counsel (although his election of rights indicated he waived legal counsel), he was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his 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 a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 9 April 2002, the separation authority 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 19 April 2002, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKF and an RE code of 3.

6.  The applicant’s record of service indicates 63 days of time lost for being AWOL from            1 August 2000 until 2 October 2001, mode of return unknown.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  An Article 15, dated 19 March 2002 for wrongfully using marijuana (020120-020219); the punishment consisted of forfeiture of $552 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days, (FG).

2.  An Article 15, dated 10 December 2001 for AWOL (010801-011002); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, extra duty for 14 days and restriction for 14 days, (CG).

3.  The record contains several negative/performance counseling statements dated between 24 May 2001 and 28 February 2002 being restricted, missing guard mount, failing to report on numerous occasions, and being recommended for separation from service.


4.  The record also contains a DA Form 4187-E (Personnel Action), dated between 21 August 2001, which indicated the applicant’s duty status changed from present for duty to AWOL.

5.  A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 6 March 2002, which indicated there was no psychiatric disease or defect which warrants disposition through medical channels; and the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative (or judicial) action deemed appropriate by command.

6.  A positive urinalysis report coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 19 February 2002, for THC.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a self-authored statement, and two pages of sick call and medical/appointment slips, and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any information with his application.

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.



ANALYST’S 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 that 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.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Articles 15, several negative counseling statements, and a positive urinalysis report.

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 was under the influence and did not receive any real help with his problem, which was not his fault.  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.  Further, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.

6.  The applicant further contends it has been thirteen years since his discharge and for eight years he has not been in any trouble.  The applicant is to be commended for his efforts; however, this contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued.  

7.  The applicant also contends he needs a better paying job for his family, his family’s military name and his country.  The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

8.  The applicant additionally contends he was not given a fair chance to recover.  The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.   The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record.


9.  The applicant desires to come back into the Army.  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 3.  An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 

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

11.  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:  Records Review       Date:  2 May 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)		AR20130015411



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1