IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 21 January 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140002171 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was young when he made mistakes while in the service. The applicant contends an upgrade to his discharge will allow him to go to college or get a good job. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 29 January 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 30 September 2009 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: B Battery, 3d Battalion, 29th Field Artillery Regiment, 3d Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Carson, CO f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 20 February 2008/6 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 7 months, 11 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 2 months, 12 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 060622-060718, N/A RA, 060719-080219, HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 13B10, Cannon Crewmember m. GT Score: 108 n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Iraq (071206-090209) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: N/A s. Performance Ratings: N/A t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 July 2006 for a period of 4 years and 16 weeks. He reenlisted on 20 February 2008, for a period of 6 years and was 19 years old at the time and had a GED certificate. He served in Iraq, earned an ARCOM and an AAM, and completed 3 years, 2 months, and 12 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Carson, Colorado. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 9 September 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, by reason misconduct (serious offense). Specifically for the following offenses: a. wrongfully using cocaine (on or about 2 July 2009 and on or about 5 July 2009) b. failing to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty on divers occasions (090506-090609) 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 10 September 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and elected not to submit a statement on 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 14 September 2009, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 30 September 2009, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and an RE code of 3. 6. The applicant’s service 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: PO, Probable Cause, 5 July 2009, cocaine. 2. An Article 15, dated 7 July 2009, failure to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty on four occasions (090626, 090609, 090514, and 090506). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $326.00 for one month, 14 days of extra duty and restriction (CG). 3. An Article 15, dated 11 August 2009, for wrongfully using cocaine (090702-090705). The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $699.00 pay per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG). 4. Six negative counseling statements dated between 30 April 2009 and 3 August 2009, for showing up to work late, missing formations, disobeying orders, dereliction of duty, wrongful use of a controlled substance, failure to be at appointed place of duty, and disobeying an NCO. 5. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 4 September 2009, reflects the applicant had a clear and normal thought process and was mentally responsible. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 12 October 2013, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None was provided 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. 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 that 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. By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by two Articles 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and six 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 that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. 5. The applicant has expressed his desire to obtain better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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: 21 January 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None 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) AR20140002171 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1