IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	2 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130015511
___________________________________________________________________________

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 the results of a command directed urinalysis into the discharge process.  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 an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.
 
2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was inequitable because he was never rehabilitated properly.  Prior to deploying in June 2006, he never had the chance to complete the Army drug abuse program.  Upon his return he was facing possible PTSD symptoms and resorted to illegal drugs as a way of coping with his stress.  He tested positive on a urinalysis and once again his chain of command failed to send him to ASAP. Since his discharge he has been a model citizen and has been gainfully employed.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		19 August 2013	
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			14 January 2009	
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, 14-12c(2), 							JKK, RE-4	
e. Unit of Assignment:			A Co, 296th Bde Spt Bn, Fort Lewis, WA	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	2 November 2006, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 year, 2 months, 0 days
h. Total Service:			4 years, 8 months, 1 day
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA (040514-061101), HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92A10, Automated Logistics Specialist
m. GT Score:				100
n. Education:				HS Graduate	
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (0060624-070927)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, 							OSR-2
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No	
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No


SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 May 2004.  On 2 November 2006, he reenlisted for a period of 4 years.  He was 22 years old at the time of his reenlistment and was a high school graduate.  He was assigned to Fort Lewis, WA when his discharge proceedings were initiated.  He served a combat tour in Iraq and his record of service shows he was awarded an ARCOM and an AGCM.    

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 28 October 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (drug abuse), specifically for the following offenses:

      a. Wrongfully using marijuana between 7 May 2008 and 6 June 2008
      b. Wrongfully using marijuana between 12 December 2005 and 12 January 2006
      c. Wrongfully using marijuana between 29 February 2006 and 29 March 2006
      d. Wrongfully using marijuana between 19 March 2006 and 19 April 2006
      e. Also considering wrongful use of marijuana between 27 December 2005 and 
      27 January 2006.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the commander recommended the separation action be suspended for a period of 6 months.

3.  On 28 October 2008, the applicant declined legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service but that the discharge be suspended for 6 months.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended disapproval of the discharge and retention of the applicant in the Army.

4.  On 15 December 2008, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The Transition Center (TC) appropriately selected the SPD code, reentry code, and reason for the discharge to execute the commander's intent which in this case was to discharge the applicant for wrongfully using illegal drugs.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 provides the authority for Transition Centers (TC) throughout the Army to execute the commanders’ intent and in this case the TC selected the appropriate reentry code, the SPD Code that identified the type of separation and the correct paragraph from AR 635-200 that corresponded with the reason for the applicant’s separation as described in the discharge packet.

6.  The applicant was separated on 14 January 2009, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKK, and an RE code of 4.               

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.   A confirmation report of biochemical tests which indicates several positive urinalyses for marijuana.  The report indicates the tests were coded IR (Inspection Random) and the samples were collected on 6 June 2008, 19 April 2006, 29 March 2006, 7 February 2006,      12 January 2006, and 27 January 2006.

2.  A results report for a urinalysis dated 27 January 2006, which was coded CO (Command Directed).

3.  Field Grade Article 15 imposed on 15 July 2008, for wrongful use of marijuana (080507-080606).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $751.00 for 2 months, and 45 days of extra duty.

4.  Field Grade Article 15 imposed on 23 May 2006, for wrongful use of marijuana on 2 occasions (051212-060112 and 051227-060127).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $713.00 (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty.

5.  One negative counseling statement dated 27 June 2008, for a positive urinalysis.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided no supporting documentation with his application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

Applicant states he is a model citizen and has been gainfully employed.

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.  After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records and the issues submitted with the application, the characterization of service appears to be improper.  

2.  The record confirms that on 27 January 2006, the applicant was given a command directed urinalysis (CO) and he tested positive for marijuana.  On 23 May 2006, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment for wrongfully using marijuana based on several urinalyses one of which was the command directed urinalysis obtained on 27 January 2006.  His punishment for these offenses was reduction to the grade of E-2, a forfeiture of pay in the amount of $713.00 per month for 2 months (suspended) and 45 days of extra duty.

3.  There is no indication in the Chapter paperwork that the command recognized that the “Command Directed Urinalysis” could not be used as the basis for the Article 15.  Further, there is no indication the command believed the urinalysis was improperly coded “CO.”  There is no MP or CID report or counseling statements that shed any light on the reason the urinalysis was authorized.  

4.  Therefore, it appears the urinalysis was properly coded CO and in accordance with 
AR 600-85, use of this information mandates the award of an honorable characterization of service. The records show the proper discharge and separation procedures were not followed in this case.  

5.  In view of the foregoing, the characterization of service being improper, recommend the Board grant full relief by upgrading the applicant’s characterization to honorable.  However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and remains both proper and equitable.   



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  2 October 2013      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:	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)		AR20130015511

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1