IN THE CASE OF:	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:	5 March 2014

      CASE NUMBER:	AR20130012499
___________________________________________________________________________

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

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he would like to use his educational benefits.  When he returned from deployment, he experienced PTSD.  He completed and turned in the paperwork.  He received no help, so he self medicated.  If he received the help he needed, he would have never turned to drugs.  He has been clean for almost 10 years.  His discharge is preventing him from obtaining jobs.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	8 July 2013
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions
	c.	Date of Discharge:	31 March 2004
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(2), 
			JKK, RE-4
	e.	Unit of assignment:	516th Maintenance Co, 3rd Bn, 43rd ADA, 11th ADA 
			Bde, Fort Bliss, TX 
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	11 May 2001, 4 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 10 months, 20 days
	h.	Total Service:	5 years, 6 months, 3 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:	RA (980929-010510) / HD
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-4
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	52C10, Utility Equipment Repairer
	m.	GT Score:	91
	n.	Education:	HS Graduate
	o.	Overseas Service:	SWA
	p.	Combat Service:	Location NIF (030319-030501) 
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	ARCOM; AAM-2; AGCM; NDSM; GWOTEM; AFEM; 
			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 28 September 1998.  The record shows he reenlisted on 11 May 2001, for a period of 4 years.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  The record shows he served in SWA during two separate periods: from 1 August 1999 through 15 December 1999 (4 months and 16 days), and from 19 March 2003 through 1 May 2003 (1 month and 12 days), for a total of 5 months and 28 days of foreign service.  Locations of both tours are NIF.  He earned an ARCOM and two AAM awards.  He completed 5 years, 6 months, and 3 days of active duty service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence shows that on 16 March 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct-commission of a serious offense, specifically for wrongfully using cocaine (030903).

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 17 March 2004, the applicant waived consulting with legal counsel, indicated he understood 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 17 March 2004, 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 31 March 2004, for misconduct (drug abuse), under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(2), with an SPD Code of JKK, and an RE code of 4.  

6.  The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Field Grade Article 15 imposed on 1 October 2003, for wrongfully using cocaine (030903).  His punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of pay in the amount of $575.00 per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction.

2.  The record contains a positive urinalysis coded as IU (Inspection - Unit), dated 3 September 2003, that was positive for cocaine.

3.  A negative counseling statement, dated 15 September 2003, for receiving a positive urinalysis and charges being brought up against him for use of drugs.
      
4.  DA Form 3822-R, Mental Status Evaluation, dated 30 October 2003, provided diagnosis of cocaine abuse, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and personality disorder not otherwise specified.  It further indicated that there is no mental disease or defect which warranted disposition through medical channels; he was mentally responsible and had the capacity to understand the administrative proceedings; and he was psychologically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command.   

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided an original manual filled DD Form 2796, Post Deployment Health Assessment, dated 6 November 2003, which indicates OIF deployment (date of arrival in theater (020929) and date of departure from theater (030602)).  Of note, this document shows the applicant did not seek, nor did he intend to seek, counseling or care for his mental health and that the reviewing PA found no grounds for any referral to any clinic for follow-up evaluation or treatment.

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 service record, and the documents and 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.  His record of service was marred by an Article 15 for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

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 he experienced PTSD when he returned from deployment and received no help and turned to drugs to alleviate his problems.  However, the service record contains no evidence of a Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis and the applicant submitted insufficient evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Moreover, a Mental Status Evaluation, dated 30 October 2003, indicates he underwent a mental status evaluation which shows he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  Further, there are many Soldiers with the PTSD condition that completed their service successfully.  

5.  The applicant contends that since leaving the Army he has been clean from drugs for almost 10 years.  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.  

6.  The applicant has expressed his desire to have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill.  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 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.

7.  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.  

8.  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:  5 March 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)		AR20130012499

Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1