IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 

      BOARD DATE:  	11 March 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130020598
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing her testimony, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s testimony.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable 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 her general, under honorable conditions discharge to fully honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, at the time of her separation she had no proof to support her situation.  She took a lie detector test and passed but she still was discharged.  She contends her platoon sergeant had a motive to have her discharged and she should have reported it and used all the resources available to fight her discharge.  She did not have a lawyer and did not fully understand what her discharge from the Army meant.  She contends she would like to rejoin the military.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			12 November 2013
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				20 April 2006
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200,
Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:				119th Transportation Company, Fort Story, VA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		17 June 2004/3 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		1 year, 10 months, 4 days
h. Total Service:				1 year, 10 months, 4 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		88H10, Cargo Specialist
m. GT Score:					103
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		NA
s. Performance Ratings:			NA
t. Counseling Statements:			Yes
u. Prior Board Review:				No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 June 2004 for a period of 3 years.  She was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  Her record is void of any significant acts of achievement or valor.  She completed 1 year, 10 months, and 4 days of active duty service.  When her discharge proceedings were initiated, she was serving at Fort Eustis, Virginia.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On an unknown date, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense), for use of amphetamines, a controlled substance. 

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 21 March 2006, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notice from his unit commander of his intent to separate her from the military.

4.  On 22 March 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and on 23 March 2006, she elected to not submit a statement in her own 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

5.  On 6 April 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

6.  The applicant was separated on 20 April 2006, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKQ, and an RE code of 3. 

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 6 March 2006, for wrongful use of amphetamine, a controlled substance.  The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $636 per month for two months (suspended), to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 4 July 2006, extra duty and restriction for 45 days, and an oral reprimand (FG).

2.  There is one positive urinalysis report contained in the record:

      IU, Unit Sweep, 17 January 2006, amphetamine, d-methamphetamine, and methanphetamine

3.  DA Form 8003 (Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment), dated 
22 February 2006, reflects the applicant was command referred for treatment.  On 
27 February 2006, the applicant was returned to duty with no further action required.
4.  A memorandum, dated 21 February 2006, indicates legitimate use of a controlled substance could not be determined based on the supporting documentation provided by the chain of command.  The supporting documentation showed the applicant was taking Midrin.
      
5.  Applicant’s medication profile, reflects she was prescribed Midrin on 31 October 2005 and 
24 January 2006.

6.  A memorandum, dated 1 March 2006, reflects the applicant was evaluated by Community Health Services, McDonald Army Community Hospital, for a Chapter 14 mental status exam.  The applicant was determined to have a mental status within normal limits.

7.  DA Form 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form), dated 22 February 2006, for testing positive on a company urinalysis for an illegal substance abuse.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an online application, dated 21 October 2013, and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any in support of her 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.
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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (serious offense).

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge and narrative reason change was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, her military records, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The record confirms the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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.  The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier.  The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies.  By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of her service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15, a positive urinalysis test, and a negative counseling statement.

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 requests a change to the reason for her discharge.  However, 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for serious offense.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.    

5.  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 3.  There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code.  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. 

6.  The applicant contends her platoon sergeant took negative actions against her in order to have her separated from the military.  However, 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 her overall service record.  Further, she had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that she ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.  

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

8.  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:  Personal Appearance    Date:  11 March 2014     Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE:

1.  The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentions.

2.  In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing.

Board Vote:
Character Change:  3	No Change:  2
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)		AR20130020598



Page 2 of 7 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1