IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  13 September 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120005421 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states he was told by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to appeal his discharge through the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR).  He further states he enlisted during a wartime era and he was diagnosed as suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and poly-substance abuse.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting documentation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 November 2002 for a period of 3 years.  He completed training and he was awarded military occupational specialty 92F (Petroleum Supply Specialist).  He was promoted to the rank/grade of specialist (SPC)/E-4 on 1 May 2005.  On 21 December 2005, he reenlisted for a period of 4 years.

2.  During his first enlistment, he was awarded the Army Achievement Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, and the Overseas Service Ribbon. 

3.  On 15 June 2006, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for wrongfully using marijuana between 26 February and 28 March 2006.  

4.  On 26 June 2006, the applicant's command initiated separation proceedings against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct – commission of a serious offense.  The specific reason was his illegal use of marijuana.  It was recommended the applicant receive a general discharge.

5.  The discharge authority subsequently approved the separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for commission of a serious offense.  He directed the applicant be given a general discharge.

6.  On 9 July 2006, the applicant was discharged accordingly in the rank/grade of PV1/E-1.  He completed 3 years, 7 months, and 21 days of creditable active service with no time lost.

7.  The available record does not include and the applicant did not provide any service or post-service medical records.

8.  On 25 March 2008, the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge.  On 22 January 2009, after careful review of his application, military records and all other available evidence, the ADRB determined he was properly and equitably discharged.  Accordingly, his request for a change in the character of his discharge was denied.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense (one for which a punitive discharge is warranted and authorized), and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.  It further states abuse of illegal drugs is serious misconduct.

	b.  Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because he enlisted during a wartime era and he was diagnosed with PTSD and poly-substance abuse.

2.  The applicant's administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  Although an under other than honorable conditions discharge was normally appropriate for abuse of illegal drugs, it appears the applicant's command considered his initial period of service and his overall record of service when he was issued a general discharge.

3.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant reenlisted on 21 December 2005, and during this period of enlistment he accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ for wrongfully using marijuana, which is a serious offense.  Therefore, his service during the period under review clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.

4.  Although he claims he was diagnosed with PTSD and poly-substance abuse, there is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any medical evidence to substantiate this claim.

5.  The ABCMR does not grant requests for upgrade of discharges solely for the purpose of making the applicant eligible for veterans' benefits.  Every case is individually decided based upon its merits when an applicant requests a change in his or her discharge.  Additionally, the granting of veterans' benefits is not within the purview of the ABCMR.  Any questions regarding eligibility for health care and other benefits should be addressed to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant an honorable discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X____  ___X_____  ____X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ____________X___________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120005421



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120005421



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1