IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 June 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130018853 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. 2. The applicant indicates that his statement is attached; however, no such attachment was received with his application. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 June 2007 for a period of 3 years and training as a signal support systems specialist. He completed his training and was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas. 2. He deployed to Iraq from 5 February 2009 through 5 February 2010. During that deployment, on 1 November 2009, he reenlisted for a period of 4 years, training as a human intelligence collector, and a selective reenlistment bonus. 3. On 20 April 2011, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for the wrongful use of D-Amphetamine, a schedule II substance. 4. On 26 May 2011, his commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct – drug abuse. 5. On 1 June 2011, the applicant waived consultation with counsel and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. 6. On 9 June 2011, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that he be furnished a general discharge. 7. Accordingly, on 28 June 2011, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c (2), for misconduct – drug abuse, with a general discharge. He had served 4 years and 3 days of active service. 8. On 15 July 2012, he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge. He asserted that he was unaware the Adderall pill that he took was a narcotic and he regretted taking it. He also stated that he was discharged without the benefit of being entered into the Army Substance Abuse Program. He also stated that he was attempting to become a police officer, that he had a son, and that he regrets every day having taken that pill. He asked the ADRB to realize that he was a kid who made one mistake and asked that he not be made to pay for that mistake the rest of his life. On 5 December 2012, the ADRB voted unanimously to deny his appeal. 9. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and procedures for separating personnel for misconduct. Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, and commission of a serious offense, which includes drug offenses. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 10. Paragraph 3-7a of Army Regulation 635-200 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. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions regarding his discharge have been noted; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating when compared to the serious nature of his misconduct. The applicant's overall service simply did not rise to the level of a fully honorable discharge. 2. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. 3. Accordingly, the characterization and the narrative reason for separation were appropriate for the circumstances of his case. 4. In the absence of evidence showing an error or injustice occurred in his case, there appears to be no basis to grant his request. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x___ ____x___ ___x____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _____________x____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130018853 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130018853 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1