IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	14 May 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130016357
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s 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, he made an error in judgment by using illegal drugs at the time to cope with the stress of war.  He has sustained a drug free life and has been employed with the same company for over four years.  He would like to have his discharge upgraded to continue improving his life.  He desires to receive VA benefits to continue his education and build on his military experience.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		26 August 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			21 April 2006
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14
      paragraph 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:			659th Maintenance Company, 4-159th Aviation 						Regiment, Fort Bragg, NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	12 September 2002, 6 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 7 months, 10 days
h. Total Service:			3 years, 7 months, 10 days
i. Lost time:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	52D10, Power Generation Equipment Repairer
m. GT Score:				101
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (040624-050624)
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 September 2002, for a period of 6 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a HS Graduate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 52D10, Power Generation Equipment Repairer.  His record also shows that he served a combat tour, but he 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 Bragg, NC when his discharge was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 16 March 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs for testing positive for marijuana (060117).

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 20 March 2006, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated he intended to submit a statement on his behalf, which was not contained in the available records.  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 29 March 2006, 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 21 April 2006, 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), with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK and an RE code of 4. 

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  An Article 15, dated 24 February 2006, for wrongfully using marijuana (051217-060117); the punishment consisted of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $850 pay x 2 months (suspended), extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 30 days, (FG).

2.  The record contains a positive urinalysis report coded IR (Inspection Random), dated 17 January 2006 for THC.

3.  The applicant received two negative counseling statements, dated 30 January 2006 and      2 February 2006 for testing positive on a urinalysis test.

4.  An administrative General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 1 February 2004 for driving while intoxicated.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: 

The applicant provided a DD Form 293.
POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant did not provide any information with his 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.

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 record of service, his military records, 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, 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.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15, a positive urinalysis report, two negative counseling statements, and a GOMOR.
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 he made an error in judgment by using illegal drugs at the time to cope with the stress of war.  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.  

5.  The applicant further contends he has sustained a drug free life since his discharge and has been employed with the same company for over four years.  The applicant is to be commended for his efforts; however, this contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued.  

6.  The applicant also would like to have discharge upgraded to continue improving his life. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

7.  The applicant desires to receive VA benefits to continue his education and build on his military experience.  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 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, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. 



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  14 May 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)		AR20130016357



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1