IN THE CASE OF:	 

      BOARD DATE:  	18 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130005733
___________________________________________________________________________

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 to upgrade his characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, serving in the military is a serious undertaking which requires dedication and responsibility.  An upgrade of his discharge will provide him with all the necessary tools to help continue advancing to the next level of his life, with more education, medical benefits for his health, and the power to help others at his job and in his community.  A theory of change describes a process of desired social change by making explicit the way we think about a current situation or problem, its underlying causes, the long-term change we seek, and what needs to happen in society in order for that change to come about.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	19 March 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	22 February 2010
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Paragraph 
			14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4
	e.	Unit of assignment:	263rd Maintenance Company, 553rd Combat 
			Sustainment Support Battalion, Fort Hood, TX
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	25 July 2007, 3 years, 2 weeks
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 6 months, 28 days 
	h.	Total Service:	3 years, 9 months, 0 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	ARNG (060523-060612) / NA
			ADT    (060613-061122) / HD
			ARNG (061123-070724) / HD
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-3
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	91C10, Utilities Equipment Repairer
	m.	GT Score:	NIF
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	Korea 
	p.	Combat Service:	None
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	NDSM; KDSM; ASR; OSR
	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 Army National Guard and was discharged with an honorable characterization of service, and subsequently enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 July 2007, for a period of 3 years and 2 weeks.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served in Korea.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  He completed 3 years and 9 months of creditable reserve and active service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 15 December 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason misconduct (serious offense).  Specifically for abuse of illegal drug by testing positive for cocaine (091013) and receiving a FG Article 15 for the offense (091123).

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 4 January 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and elected to 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 2 February 2010, 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 22 February 2010, 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), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) 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.  There is a positive urinalysis report contained in the record:  IU, Inspection Unit, 13 October 2009, cocaine.

2.  Article 15, dated 23 November 2009, wrongful use of cocaine (091006-091013).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $699 per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction, (FG). 

3.  Five negative counseling statements, dated between 12 January 2009 and 2 November 2009, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty; being found in an NCO barracks room by the brigade CSM; being separated for wrongful use and possession of controlled substances and receiving a positive urinalysis results for cocaine, and failing to maintain living quarters. 


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided two character reference letters. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant provided none. 

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, and 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 an Article 15 for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and numerous negative counseling statements.

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 third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant’s performance.  They all recognize his good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant’s chain of command.  As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity or toward an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge.

5.  The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill, to have better job opportunities and health benefits.  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 and medical benefits 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.

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:  Records Review        Date:  18 October 2013        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel:  None

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)		AR20130005733

Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1