IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	12 February 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130010657
___________________________________________________________________________

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 is requesting an upgrade of his discharge in order to receive his GI bill.  He would like to be able to go to college and make something of himself.    


DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		3 June 2013 
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			17 February 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, 14-12c(2) 						JKK, RE-4        
e. Unit of assignment:			23rd Military Police Company, 91st Military Police 						Battalion, Fort Drum, NY
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	22 July 2009, 5 years 
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 6 months, 26 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 6 months, 26 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	31B10, Military Police
m. GT Score:				86
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			No
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 22 July 2009, for a period of 5 years.  He was 19 years old at the time of entry and high graduate.  He was serving at Fort Drum, NY  when his discharge was initiated.  His record contains no evidence of acts of valor or significant achievements. 

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The evidence shows that on 8 February 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, for commission of a serious offense, abuse of illegal drugs, specifically for wrongfully using marijuana.

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 9 February 2012, the applicant waived consulting 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 13 February 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 17 February 2012, for misconduct (drug abuse), under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c(2), with an RE code of 4.

6.  The service record does not contain any evidence of time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  The applicant received a field grade Article 15, dated 18 January 2012, for wrongfully using marijuana (111030-111128); his punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-3, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $934.00 for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty,  and an oral reprimand.

2.  One negative counseling dated 1 February 2012, for being recommended for separation.  

3.  A CID investigation, dated 19 December 2011, for wrongful use of marijuana.

4.  The record also contains a positive urinalysis coded as IU (Inspection Unit), dated 
28 November 2011, that was positive for marijuana.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

None were provided with the application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were 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 issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The record confirms that 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.  

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 requests an upgrade of his discharge in order to receive educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill.  However, 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 applicant contends he would like to make a better life for himself.  The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

6.  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.  

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:  12 February 2014     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)		AR20130010657



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1