IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	4 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006252
___________________________________________________________________________

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.  He states, in effect, his unit’s goal was to get him out of the Army because they no longer wanted to deal with him.  He tried everything to get help for his problem from the Army and did not get the help he needed.  Since his discharge he has been clean and sober for almost a year. He deserves an honorable discharge 

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		29 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			29 May 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14, 						paragraph 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:			HHC, 2-30th Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat						Team, Fort Polk, LA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	23 September 2008, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 8 months, 7 days
h. Total Service:			3 years, 8 months, 7 days
i. Lost time:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	68W10, Health Care Specialist
m. GT Score:				108
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Afghanistan (101021-110202)
q. Decorations/Awards:		AGCM, NDSM, ACM-W/2 CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, 					NATO MDL, CMB
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		No
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 September 2008, for a period of 4 years.  He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a HS Graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 68W10, Health Care Specialist.  His record also shows he served a combat tour, but did not earn any awards for acts of valor or meritorious achievements and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  He was serving at Fort Polk, LA when his discharge was initiated.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 22 May 2012, 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 of misconduct-commission of a serious offense.  Specifically for the following offenses:

     a.  violating a no contact order between (110728-120326)

     b.  leaving his appointed place of duty

     c.  violating a lawful general order

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 23 May 2012, 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

4.  On 23 May 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’s record of service does not contain any documented evidence of unauthorized absences, lost time or negative counseling statements.

6.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 29 May 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), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK and an RE code of 4. 

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  An Article 15, dated 26 September 2011 for willfully disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (SFC), (110830); the punishment consisted of extra duty for 14 days, restriction for 14 days and an oral reprimand, (Summarized).

2.  An Article 15, dated 4 April 2012 for violating a lawful general order General Order, to wit: paragraph 4(c) Command Policy Memorandum SJA-03, Prohibiting Possession of Drug Paraphernalia and Inhalant Abuse, dated 30 November 2011, by wrongfully inhaling compressed air (110326); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $745 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days, (FG).


3.  The record contains a Memorandum for Record, Summary of Rehabilitation Efforts, dated 10 May 2012, which indicated the applicant went to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) on 22 March 2012, as a medical referral after he was hospitalized due to complications from opiate use and huffing.  He was enrolled with a diagnosis of opiate dependence on 26 March 2012.

4.  The record also contains a Memorandum for Record, Chapter Recommendation and Background Information, dated 13 May 2012, revealed the applicant should be chaptered from the Army with a general under Honorable discharge.  He was command referred to ASAP and has failed. His counselor believes he has no desire to stop abusing drugs. It is my observation he is a poor performer and cannot be trusted to not take drugs without being watched at all times.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, hand written statement, two pages, Bayne-Jones Army Community Hospital Physicians Discharge Summary, three pages, and Brentwood, Continuing Care/Discharge Planning, two pages.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant stated he is an electrician attending school to earn his journeyman’s and master’s license.

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 his military record, the issues and documents 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 possessing and 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 a Field Grade and Summarized Articles 15.

3.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.

4.  The applicant contends his unit’s goal was to get him out of the Army because they no longer wanted to deal with him.  However, 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.

5.  The applicant further contends he tried everything to get help for his problem from the Army and did not get the help he needed.  The evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by the imposition of non-judicial punishment.  The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts.  As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service.

6.  Further, ASAP informed the applicant he would not be admitted to inpatient care at Laurel Ridge based on him being a liability after trying to break into the crash cart twice, in an attempt to steal the drugs.  He was placed on 24 hour buddy watch and during that time while in full view of the CQ, he attempted to huff canned air.


7.  The applicant also contends since his discharge he has been clean and sober for almost a year. He deserves an honorable discharge.  The applicant is to be commended for his efforts.  However, these contentions are not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because they raise no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor are they associated with the discharge at the time it was issued.  

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

9.  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:  4 October 2013   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)		AR20130006252



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1