IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	23 April 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130012370
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his combat service.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  





      
      
      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 tested positive for methamphetamine in August of
2012, shortly after returning from a training exercise and a month long rotation of NTC in Fort Irwin which he was promoted to E-5/Sergeant.  He was not informed of his positive results until the beginning of December.  He would like to know why it took so long for his results to finally get back to the unit and to him.  He admitted fully that he had taken a non prescribed adderall.  His service status and records shows he was a good Soldier and put the mission first.  He is asking the board to look through his service records and comments from higher ranking individuals to consider his discharge being updated to honorable.  Now that he is out of the service he has enrolled in college without his education benefits due to the type of discharge he received.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		1 July 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			24 April 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, 14-12c(2), 						JKK, RE-4        
e. Unit of assignment:			B Company, 4th Battalion, 23d Infantry Regiment, 						Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	10 May 2010, 6 years 
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 11 months, 14 days
h. Total Service:			5 years, 4 months, 4 days
i. Time Lost:				None								
j. Previous Discharges:		ARNG (061221-070717), NA									(IADT (070718-071102), HD									ARNG (071103-090128), HD									RA (090129-100509), HD										     (Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-5	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	11B10, Infantryman
m. GT Score:				92
n. Education:				High School Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Afghanistan (100131-110129)
q. Decorations/Awards:		AM, ARCOM, AAM-3, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-w/CS-2, 						GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CIB, AM
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 ARNG on 21 December 2006, for six years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He joined the Regular Army on 29 January 2009, for 3 years.  He reenlisted on 10 May 2010, for a period of 3 years.  He was serving at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, when his discharge was initiated.  He was awarded an Air Medal, ARCOM, three AAMs, AGCM, CIB, and served a combat tour in Afghanistan.   

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The evidence shows that on 3 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 misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs, specifically for wrongfully using dextroamphetamines/methamphetamines (between 110820-110920).

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 6 February 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 of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 14 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 24 April 2012, for misconduct (drug abuse), under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c (2), AR 635-200, with an SPD code of JKK, and an RE code of 4.

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

7.  The record also contains the results of a urinalysis test coded as IR (Inspection Random), dated 20 September 2011, that was positive for dextroamphetamines/methamphetamines.  











EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  The applicant received a FG 15, dated 7 December 2011, for wrongfully using dextroamphetamines/methamphetamines from (110820-110920).  His punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-4, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $1,061.00 for two months, one month suspended, 45 days of extra duty, 30 days restriction, suspended, and an oral reprimand.  

2.  One negative counseling dated 29 November 2011, for being positive for dextroanphedimine on a unit urinalysis.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, DD Form 214, an AM with recommendations, a positive performance counseling statement, two AAMs with recommendations, and an ARCOM with recommendation.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant contends he is attending college.

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.

ANALYST’S 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 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 contends that he had good service which included a combat tour.  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 his serious offense of abusing an illegal drug.  

5.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge in order to allow him 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.

6.  The applicant contends it took several months before he was informed of his positive results.  He would like to know why it took so long for his results to finally get back to the unit and to him.  A review of the unit urinalysis shows the applicant was tested on 20 September 2011.  It is unknown why he was not notified until December; 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.  

7.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 



Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the preceding Analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh, based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review	Date: 23 April 2014		 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA

Board Vote:
Character  	Change:  3	No Change:  2
Reason	Change:  0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		Yes
Change Characterization to:	Honorable
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Change Authority for Separation:	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)		AR20130012370



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1