IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 22 April 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140005830 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his combat service and his diagnosis with substance abuse and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable 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 general, under honorable conditions discharge characterization of service to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, when he returned from his deployment to Afghanistan, he was so frazzled by the war and what he had seen he began to self-medicate with marijuana and alcohol. He states, he only had one positive urinalysis test and he completed the required in-service treatment programs and successfully completed the VA sponsored treatment program as well. He states, he was a decorated Soldier who deserves an upgrade of his discharge. He contends, he has no other UCMJ actions against him. He states, he has learned from his mistakes and is a productive member of society. The applicant states, he has graduated from Fortis College and has no legal or criminal citations since his discharge. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 3 April 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 28 July 2011 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: A Company, 173rd Special Troops Battalion (Airborne), Germany f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 13 January 2009/3 years, 22 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 6 months, 16 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 6 months, 16 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 12N10, Horizontal Construction Engineer m. GT Score: 111 n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (091122-101104) q. Decorations/Awards: AAM, ACM-CS, MUC, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, NATO MDL, CAB 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 13 January 2009, for a period of 3 years and 22 weeks. He was 17 years old at the time of entry and had a General Equivalency Diploma (GED). He served in Afghanistan and earned an AAM. He completed 2 years, 6 months, 16 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving in Germany. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. On 7 July 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2), for misconduct (abuse of illegal drugs). Specifically for using marijuana between 1 January 2011 and 31 January 2011, for violating a lawful general regulation dated 2 February 2009, by smoking Spice on 27 February 2011. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 8 July 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and elected to submit a statement in his own behalf (NIF). The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. 4. On 18 July 2011, 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 28 July 2011, 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 is one positive urinalysis report contained in the record: IU, Inspection Unit, 31 January 2011, marijuana 2. Article 15, dated 17 May 2011, for violating a lawful general regulation dated 2 February 2009, by smoking Spice on 27 February 2011, and for the wrongful use of marijuana between 1 January 2011 and 31 January 2011. The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $733 per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG). 3. A counseling statement, dated 8 March 2011, for testing positive for marijuana on a urinalysis test dated 31 January 2011. 4. DA Form 3822, dated 13 May 2011, reflects the applicant had no obvious impairments, could appreciate the difference between right and wrong, and a diagnosis for alcohol abuse. He had a negative screening for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and mild Traumatic Brain Injury. The evaluation indicated the applicant was being treated for alcohol abuse. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 31 March 2014, a DD Form 214, seven certificates of training, a US Army Infantry School Airborne Course diploma, a AAM certificate, Permanent Orders Number 277-005, dated 4 October 2010, Orders Number 190-3542, dated 9 July 2009, a Fortis College diploma, and a letter from Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, dated 24 March 2014. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states he successfully completed a VA sponsored treatment program, graduated from Fortis College, and has no legal or criminal citations since his discharge from the Army. 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, the documents 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 a FG Article 15, a positive urinalysis test and a negative counseling statement. 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 only had one positive urinalysis test and no other UCMJ actions. However, the available record reflects the applicant received a FG Article 15 for violating a lawful general regulation for smoking Spice on 27 February 2011. Further, the applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 5. The applicant also contends he was a decorated Soldier who deserves an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the positive urinalysis test or by the negative counseling statement and the documented action under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 6. The applicant contends that since leaving the Army he has successfully completed a VA sponsored treatment program, graduated from Fortis College and has no legal or criminal citations since his discharge. The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with 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. 7. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his combat service and his diagnosis with substance abuse and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 24 April 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 3 No Change: 2 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) AR20140005830 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1