IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	23 August 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130004774
___________________________________________________________________________

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, upgrading his discharge would allow him to get a better job, continue his education, and would really change his life for the better.   

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		7 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			12 February 2009
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, 14-12c(2) 						JKK, RE-4        
e. Unit of assignment:			HHC, 1st Battalion, 17th Infantry Regiment. Fort 						Lewis, WA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	31 October 2007, 5 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 3 months, 12 days
h. Total Service:			1 year, 3 months, 12 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	25U10, Signal Support Systems Specialist
m. GT Score:				97
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, ASR
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 31 October 2007, for a period of 5 years.  He was 21 years old at the time of entry and was a high graduate.  He was serving at Fort Lewis, WA when his discharge was initiated.  He had no special awards or meritorious achievements.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The evidence shows that on 16 December 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs, specifically for twice testing positive for marijuana (080908 and 081007).
2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.  

3.  On 5 January 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not submit a statement on his 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 of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 23 January 2009, 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 12 February 2009, for misconduct (drug abuse), under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(2), with an SPD Code of JKK, and an 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.  Field Grade Article 15 imposed on 15 October 2008, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 080809-080908).  The punishment imposed consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $673 00 pay per month for two months, and 45 days extra duty and restriction. 

2.  A negative counseling dated 10 December 2008, notifying the applicant of intent to chapter.

3.  The record also contains the results of two urinalysis coded as IU (Inspection Unit), dated 
8 September 2008 and IO (Inspection Other), dated 7 October 2008, that were positive for marijuana.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and a DD Form 214.

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 service record and the issue 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 service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  His record of service was marred by an Article
15 for serious violations 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 has expressed his desire to have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill.  However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.
5.  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 his overall service record.  

6.  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: 23 August 2013	Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: No

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 RE Code to:			No Change
Grade Restoration to:			NA
Change Authority for Separation:		No Change
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)		AR20130004774



Page 2 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1