IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	15 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130001344
___________________________________________________________________________

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, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge to help with getting his life back on track.  He was young and foolish and regrets his past decision and now needs a second chance in life.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		18 January 2013	
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			26 April 2012	
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, 14-12c(2)							JKK, RE-4
e. Unit of Assignment:			A Co, 2nd Bn, 13th AV Regt, Fort Huachuca, AZ	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	6 June 2011, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	10 months, 21 days
h. Total Service:			10 months, 21 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	None
m. GT Score:				113
n. Education:				HS Graduate	
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM
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 6 June 2011 for a period of 4 years.  He was    20 years old at the time and a high school graduate.  He was serving at Fort Huachuca, AZ when his discharge was initiated.  The record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements.



SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 11 April 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs for testing positive for THC (marijuana).

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

3.  On 13 April 2012, the applicant consulted with 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 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.

4.  On 19 April 2012, 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 26 April 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, for misconduct (drug abuse), with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK and a RE code of 4. 

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.   There is one positive urinalysis report contained in the record coded as IU, (Inspection Unit), with a collection date of 3 January 2012, for THC (marijuana).

2.  Article 15, dated 6 February 2012, for the wrongful use of marijuana between (111203 and 120103).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $745.00 pay per month for two months, extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 60 days (FG).

3.  Two counseling statements dated between 20 January 2012 and 25 January 2012 concerning his wrongful use and possession of a controlled substances and recommendation for separation.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided no additional documents.



POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the 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.

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 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 his service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by his Article 15 for a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

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 an upgrade of his discharge will allow him the opportunity to getting his life back on track.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

5.  The applicant also contends he was young and foolish at the time of discharge.  The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

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

7.  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: Record Review	  Date: 15 May 2013   Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

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:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
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)		AR20130001344



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1