IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 20 October 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20140008446 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony 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 to fully honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was wrongfully discharged for misconduct. He contends he was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) at the time and is currently receiving treatment from the Veterans Administration. He states he was under a lot of stress and decided to self-medicate with marijuana prior to his deployment to Iraq. His leave was terminated after his positive urinalysis but he continued on leave and was charged with being AWOL after his return to his unit. He contends his misconduct was an isolated event and he was still a trusted Soldier. He would like to have his honor restored and the Board to note his accomplishment of completing a bachelor’s degree since his discharge from the military. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 9 May 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 23 August 2006 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: Rear Detachment, 3-7th Field Artillery, Schofield Barracks, HI f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 4 November 2003/4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 9 months, 6 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 9 months, 6 days i. Time Lost: 14 days j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 13B10, Cannon Crewmember m. GT Score: 113 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (040328-050320) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CAB, OSB-2 r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: Yes SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 November 2003, for a period of 4 years. He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He served in Afghanistan and earned an ARCOM and AAM. He completed 2 years, 9 months, and 6 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. On 18 July 2006, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), for misconduct (drug abuse). Specifically for: a. being AWOL from 5 June 2006 until 19 June 2006, and, b. wrongful use of marijuana on or about 7 March 2006 and 7 April 2006. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On an unknown date, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. However, the election of rights form shows he waived consultation with counsel and stated that his elections were contingent upon him receiving a general discharge. 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 July 2006, the separation 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 23 August 2006, under 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 shows he was AWOL during the period 5 June 2006 through 18 June 2006. The record is void of his mode of return. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Article 15, dated 11 July 2006, for the wrongful use of marijuana and for being AWOL. The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $636 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction (suspended), to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or before 11 January 2007 (FG). 2. There is one positive urinalysis test contained in the record: IR, Inspection Random, 7 April 2006, marijuana 3. Two counseling statements, dated 1 June 2006 and 19 June 2006, for positive urinalysis and notification of separation proceedings. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 7 May 2014 with a self-authored statement; a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review; a VA rating decision document, dated 15 August 2013, reflecting his service connected disability for PTSD; Permanent Orders Number E032-055, dated 1 February 2006, for award of the CAB; a Statement of Wartime Service, dated 15 March 2005; a certificate of achievement, dated 1 March 2005; and an additional duty appointment memorandum, dated 22 February 2006, reflecting the applicant as the alternate unit armorer. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant state he completed a bachelor’s degree. 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 for the wrongful use of marijuana, a positive urinalysis test, and two 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 the VA has granted him a service connected disability for PTSD. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. There are many Soldiers diagnosed with PTSD that completed their service successfully. 5. The applicant contends that he was dealing with a lot of stress that affected his behavior and contributed to the misconduct for which he was discharged. However, 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. 6. The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was an isolated event. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. 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. 7. The applicant stated he earned a bachelor’s degree even though he could not use his Montgomery GI Bill. 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 this accomplishment did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-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. 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, recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Personal Appearance Date: 20 October 2014 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes Counsel: Yes [redacted] Witnesses/Observers: No DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: 1. The applicant submitted the following additional documents: a. University of Virginia Transcripts – 1 page b. Resume – 1 page c. VA Disability Rating Decision – 5 pages d. Letter from Trauma Counselor – 4 pages e. Veteran Center Counseling Letter – 1 page f. Skydiving certificate – 1 page 2. The applicant presented the additional contention: a. Change narrative reason to ‘Secretarial Authority.’ In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. 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) AR20140008446 Page 6 of 7 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1