IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 June 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140005741 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge characterization to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he served his country with distinction and throughout his time in the military he grew as a person and a member of the society. He states, he was a good and honorable Soldier who served his country during the time of need. He states, since his discharge he graduated college, became a steel detail draftsman, volunteers at homes for troop competitions, and became an active member in sending funds to rebuild schools in Nigeria. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 28 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 14 May 2010 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: B Company, 3rd Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment, Fort Hood, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 8 May 2008/3 years, 16 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 7 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 7 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman m. GT Score: 105 n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Iraq (081213-091202) q. Decorations/Awards: ICM-2CS, ARCOM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, CIB r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 May 2008, for a period of 3 years and 16 weeks. He was 21 years old at the time of entry and had a General Equivalency Diploma (GED). He served in Iraq and earned an ARCOM and CIB. He completed 2 years and 7 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving in Fort Hood, TX. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. On 22 April 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, for abuse of illegal drugs; specifically for testing positive for marijuana on 20 January 2010, 2 March 2010 and for violating a General Order on 29 May 2009. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 23 April 2010, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 28 April 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 5. The applicant was separated on 14 May 2010, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, 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. There are two positive urinalysis reports contained in the record: IU, Inspection Unit, 20 January 2010, marijuana IU, Inspection Unit, 2 March 2010, marijuana 2. Article 15, dated 31 March 2010, for the wrongful use of marijuana. The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $723 pay per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG). 3. Article 15, dated 12 June 2009, for violating General Order #1 by wrongfully consuming alcohol on 29 May 2009. The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $699 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG). 4. Three negative counseling statements dated 29 May 2009, 11 February 2010, and 1 April 2010, for violating General Order #1 by drinking in a combat zone, failing a urinalysis, and separation counseling. 5. DA Form 8003 (Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment), dated 11 February 2010, reflects the applicant was command-directed to ASAP for treatment. 6. MEDCOM Form 699-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 9 March 2010, reflects the applicant had clear and normal thought process and content, was mentally responsible, and diagnosed with an anxiety disorder (NOS). EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided an online application, dated 26 March 2014 and a DD Form 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states since his discharge he has graduated college and became a Steel Detail Draftsman, volunteers at homes for troop competitions and became an active fundraiser to build schools in Nigeria. 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 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 diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by two FG Article 15s, two positive urinalysis tests and several negative counseling statements. 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 since leaving the Army he has graduated from college, became a Steel Detail Draftsman, volunteers at homes for troop competitions and became an active fundraiser to build schools in Nigeria. 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. 5. Further, The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character. 6. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 7. 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: 10 June 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: Yes [redacted] 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) AR20140005741 Page 2 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1