IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	11 December 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130011205
___________________________________________________________________________

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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.
 
2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he made a mistake prior to deployment.  He was young, wasn’t sure if he was coming back from the deployment, and used drugs because of this.  He was not discharged until seven months into the deployment.  He fought honorably for his country.  He has been diagnosed with PTSD due to his service in Iraq.  It took him almost three years after returning to go through the paperwork.  He has not used any drugs since then and he is an honest and hard working American citizen.  He would like to be able to use his Post 9-11 GI bill.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		10 June 2013	
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			18 December 2009	
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, 14-12c(2) 						JKK, RE-4	
e. Unit of Assignment:			E Company, 121st Brigade Support Battalion, 4th 						Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division, FOB 						Gary Owen, Iraq APO AE 09331	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	3 January 2008, 3 years and 16 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 11 months, 16 days
h. Total Service:			1 year, 11 months, 16 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	88M10, Motor Transport Operator
m. GT Score:				101
n. Education:				GED	
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Kuwait/Iraq (090503-091124)
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, ICM-w/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, CAB
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 3 January 2008, for a period of 3 years and 
16 weeks.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  He was serving at FOB Gary Owen, Iraq when his discharge was initiated.  He was awarded a CAB.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 9 October 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(2), for commission of a serious offense, wrongful use of cocaine on two occasions.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 14 October 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated he would not submit a statement in 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 9 November 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 separated on 18 December 2009, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKK, and an RE code of 4.               

6.  The applicant’s record does not contain any AWOL or lost time.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  There are two positive urinalysis reports (cocaine) contained in the record coded as IU, inspection unit, 18 February 2009, and 10 March 2009.

2.  One negative counseling statement dated 30 November 2009, for both positive urinalyses.

3.  A Mental Status Evaluation dated 25 September 2009, indicates the applicant did not meet the criteria for PTSD/TBI diagnoses, although he had a few mild PTSD-type symptoms due to being very close to a rocket IDF strike in June 2009.  He was diagnosed as coping well and it did not get in the way of his functioning.  The applicant was cleared for the proposed administrative action.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, DD Form 214, and documents from the VA showing that he received a disability rating of 70% for PTSD.  

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 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 (cocaine), 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.

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’s service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); however, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  The record shows that on 25 September 2009, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  It appears the applicant’s chain of command determined that although he was suffering from mild PTSD-type symptoms, he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation.  Further, there are many Soldiers with the same condition that completed their service successfully.

5.  The applicant contends he was young and made a mistake prior to deployment.  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 applicant contends he fought honorably for his country.  He was not discharged until seven months into the deployment.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents (two positive urinalyses) of misconduct.

7.  The applicant contends he has not used any drugs since then and he is an honest and hard working American citizen.  He would like to be able to use his Post 9-11 GI bill.  The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application.    However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Lastly, 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.

8.  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.  

9.  The applicant contends he wasn’t sure if he was coming back from the deployment, and used drugs because of this.  However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.  

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

11.  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:  11 December 2013       Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel:  yes [redacted]

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)		AR20130011205



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1