IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:  	20 November 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130019223
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and the Discussion and Recommendation that follows, the Board noted that the government introduced the results of a command directed urinalysis into the discharge process.  This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of an honorable discharge.  Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to honorable.  However, the Board found the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record 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 characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable and the narrative reason for separation changed to a medical one.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on everything that happened after his deployment.  Due to his deployment he became very unstable and developed a mood disorder (i.e., anxiety, depression, and irritability) while deployed to Afghanistan.  Upon his return, he was diagnosed with chronic PTSD and before receiving the proper help he started to self medicate with drugs which was wrong.  He is now on proper medication and has successfully utilized a drug abuse program to help him with his problem.  He has since filed a claim with the VA for his PTSD and TBI and is receiving counseling for each one.  He would like to request that his narrative reason for discharge be changed from drug abuse to medical in hopes of finding a job using his military discharge.   

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		19 February 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			4 October 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, 14-12c,(2) 						JKK, RE-4        
e. Unit of assignment:			595th Sapper Company, 2nd Engineer Battalion,
White Sands Missle Range, NM
f. Enlistment Date/Term:		14 October 2009, 3 years and 19 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 10 months, 20 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 10 months, 20 days
i. Time Lost:				30 days
j. Previous Discharges:		None 
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	12B10, Combat Engineer
m. GT Score:				121
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Afghanistan (100415-110415)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, NDSM, ACM-CS (2), GWOTSM, 
NATOMDL, ASR, OSR
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 14 October 2009, for a period of 3 years and 19 weeks, see DD Form 4/1 and 4/3, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document.  The DD Form 214 block 12a; date entered active duty this period is incorrect and should reflect the aforementioned date and the DD Form 214, net active service this period should show 2 years, 10 months and 20 days.  He was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served a combat tour in Afghanistan and his record documents the award of the Army Commendation Medal.  At the time his discharge proceedings were initiated he was serving at White Sands Missile Range, NM.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The record shows that on 20 July 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:

a. marijuana use on or about (110209)
b. AWOL x 3 (120606-120608), (120530-120531), (111014-111112)
c. failure to report on divers occasions

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

3.  On 10 August 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a general, under honorable conditions discharge and did not submit a statement on his behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. 

4.  On 14 August 2012, the intermediate commander reviewed the proposed separation action and recommended approval with issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.    

5.  On 6 September 2012, the senior intermediate commander reviewed the proposed separation action and recommended approval with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge.    

6.  On 19 September 2012, the separation authority reviewed the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) packet and recommended the applicant be processed for an administrative separation for misconduct under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c. 

7.  On 19 September 2012, the separation authority approved the applicant’s conditional waiver, waived further rehabilitation efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

8.  The applicant was discharged on 4 October 2012, for misconduct (drug abuse), under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), with an SPD code of JKK and a RE code of 4.

9.  The service record contains an entry of 30 days of lost time due to three periods of AWOL between 14 October 2011-11 November 2011 and 6 June 2012-7 June 2012.  The mode of return from each period of AWOL is unknown.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  An Article 15 issued on 15 August 2011, for wrongfully disobeying a lawful command from a CPT (110728).  His punishment consisted of reduction to Private (E-2), forfeiture of $822.00 pay per month for 2 months, 30 days extra duty and 45 days restriction (FG).

2.  There are twenty eight negative counseling statements dated between 25 March 2010 and 30 September 2011, in that he lost a meal and ID card, failed to be at his appointed place of duty on numerous occasions, damaged military property, assault, drunkenness, insubordination, failed to obey an order or regulation, disrespected an NCO, missed PT and accountability formation on numerous occasions, disobeyed a direct order from an NCO, left his post while on restriction, missed movement, missed formation and poor duty performance.

3.  Background Check-Specimen Data Document which shows a collection was taken on 
9 February 2011, BAC: CT14 Afghanistan-North and the test type administered was; CO, command directed which he tested positive for cannabis (THC).   

4.  DD Form 3822, Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 23 August 2011, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Adjustment disorder and positive screening for PTSD with a score of 55 and positive screening for mild Traumatic Brain Injury.  

5.  DD Form 3822, Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 1 March 2012, shows the applicant was diagnosed with AXIS I; polysubstance dependence in early full remission and chronic PTSD.  The applicant was directed to continue his appointments with the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) and with his social worker.  He was further screened for PTSD and TBI which was determined to be positive and he was referred to a Medical Evaluation Board.  He was given a S3 profile for chronic PTSD.   

6.  DD Form 3822, Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 20 June 2012, shows the applicant was diagnosed with, AXIS I; ADJDw dist in emotions and conduct, polysubs abu/dep, early rem (cocaine, cannabis, opiates, analogs, and heroin); AXIS II; Borderline PD, wDep and antisocial personality traits.  The applicant was directed to keep all of his medical appointments for treatment of his medical issues and that the ASPER command will closely monitor the applicant to prevent relapse issues until the MEB is complete.  

7.  DD Form 4187’s Personnel Action; for various periods of AWOL.   


EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

DD Form 214 dated 4 October 2012, Enlisted Records Brief, Certificate of Completion, Residential Treatment Facility,  DA Form 3822 Report of Mental Status Evaluation dated 1 March 2012, and memorandum in reference to the applicant’s overall service dated 23 January 2012.  

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any 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.  After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst determined that the characterization of service is improper.  

2.  The analyst noted that the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a command directed competence for duty (i.e., fitness for duty) biochemical test.  The record contains a DD Form 2624, which shows the applicant tested positive for marijuana on 
9 February 2011, as a result of a command directed urinalysis.  This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of an honorable characterization of service.  

3.  Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to honorable.  However, the analyst found that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.

4.  Notwithstanding the aforementioned, the applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on everything that happened after his deployment.  He became very unstable after returning home and developed a mood disorder (i.e., anxiety, depression and irritability) and after his return from Afghanistan he was diagnosed with PTSD.  He started self medicating with drugs and now he is on the proper medication and has been successful in utilizing a drug abuse program.  He is currently receiving counseling for his PTSD and TBI.  

5.  In review of the applicant’s entire service record it was determined that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and the characterization of service granted, and the applicant fully understood the difference between right and wrong.  His record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication.  In fact, the DD Form 3822’s, Report of Mental Status Evaluation dated 1 March 2012 and 20 June 2012, determined that although the applicant was suffering from drug dependency, antisocial personality traits, and PTSD, he was being treated by, competent medical authority and awaiting the completion of his medical evaluation board.  Upon completion of his medical evaluation board the separation approving authority (GCMCA) reviewed the medical evaluation board packet and determined that the applicant would be processed for an administrative separation due to his misconduct under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c.  

6.  The applicant also contends he would like his narrative reason for separation changed to medical in hopes of finding a job using his military discharge.  The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse),” and the separation code is "JKK" with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  

7.  The Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  

8.  Therefore, the reason for discharge being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review     Date:  20 November 2013     Location:  Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  5	No Change:  0
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 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)		AR 20130019223

Page 7 of 7 pages



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1