IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 27 February 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140004949 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident in his 107 months of service with no other adverse action. He states, the urinalysis conduct on 16 July 2012, was a couple of days upon returning from Afghanistan and he conducted an additional three urinalysis tests, which all came back negative. He states, since his discharge, he has been able to obtain and maintain a federal position with the US Postal Service and have had no problems with any urinalysis. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 18 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 10 January 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: A Company, William Beaumont Army Medical Center, Fort Bliss, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 1 June 2010/6 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 7 months, 10 days h. Total Service: 8 years, 11 months, 14 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 040127-040223, NA RA, 040224-061026, HD RA, 061027-081105, HD RA, 081106-100531, HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 68W10, Health Care Specialist m. GT Score: 115 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Afghanistan, (110912-120706) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-4, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CMB r. Administrative Separation Board: NIF s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 February 2004, for an undetermined period of time and had subsequent reenlistments; the latter being 1 June 2010, for 6 years. He was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He served in Afghanistan and earned four ARCOMs, an AAM and a CMB. He completed 8 years, 11 months, 14 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving in Fort Bliss, TX. 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 on 10 January 2013, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, 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. However, he was separated as a SPC/E-4 and the action that caused his reduction is not contained in the service record. 4. On 7 January 2013, DA Headquarters, 1st Armored Division and Fort Bliss, Fort Bliss, TX, Orders Number 007-0033, discharged the applicant from the Army effective 10 January 2013. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Discharge Orders Number 007-0033, DA Headquarters, 1st Armored Division and Fort Bliss, Fort Bliss, TX, dated 7 January 2013. 2. A NCOER covering the period of 1 January 2012 through 11 October 2012. The applicant was rated “Marginal” by his rater and a “4/2” for “Overall Performance/Overall Potential” by his senior rater. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided an online application, dated 14 March 2014, a DD Form 214, and a DAMIS background check. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states he holds a federal position with the US Postal Service and has had no problems with any urinalysis. 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, misconduct (drug abuse). 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 documents 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 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. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a non-commissioned officer. The applicant, as an NCO, 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 his service below that meriting an honorable discharge. The applicant’s available record of service was marred by a Relief for Cause NCOER. 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 that a change in the reason for the discharge and his reentry code would allow for his reenlistment. 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 "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), for drug offenses. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. 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 since leaving the Army he has been employed in a federal position with the US Postal Service and has not had any problems with urinalysis tests. The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 7. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character. 8. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 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: 27 February 2015 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) AR20140004949 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1