IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 1 May 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140003729 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he worked to get his rank back and three days before his time was completed; he received orders to clear out in less than 24 hours when the standard was three weeks. He desires to serve in the military again. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 25 February 2015 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 25 June 2009 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: HSC, 603rd Aviation Support Battalion, Combat Aviation Brigade, Hunter Army Airfield, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 4 May 2006, 4 years and 24 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 1 month, 22 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 1 month, 22 days i. Lost time: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 52C10, Utility Equipment Repairer m. GT Score: 98 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Iraq (070508-080731) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: No t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 May 2006, for a period of 4 years and 24 weeks. He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 52C10, Utility Equipment Repairer. His record also shows he served a combat tour, earned an ARCOM; and he achieved the rank of SPC/E-4. He was serving at Hunter Army Airfield, GA when his discharge was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 2 June 2009 the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs, for testing positive for THC (081204). 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 9 June 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions (although he was not entitled to a board), and submitted a statement on his own behalf (which is not contained in the available record). 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 16 June 2009, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 25 June 2009, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, for misconduct (drug abuse), with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK and an RE code of 4. 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. An Article 15, dated 26 January 2009, for wrongfully using marijuana (081105-081204); the punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $673 pay for two months, extra duty for 45 days and restriction for 45 days (suspended), (FG). 2. The applicant received two negative counseling statements dated 11 December 2008 and 10 February 2009, for testing positive for THC and initiation of separation action. 3. The record contains a positive urinalysis report coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 4 December 2009, for THC. 4. A MEDCOM Form 699-R (Mental Status Evaluation), dated 18 February 2009, indicating the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and cannabis abuse. There was no history of PTSD or TBI events. The applicant was mentally sound and able to appreciate any wrongfulness of his conduct and conform to the requirements of the law. He had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board and other administrative proceedings and was cleared for all administrative actions. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 149, a DD Form 214, congressional and special actions letter with associated congressional documents. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any information with his 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, the issues and documents 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 an Article 15, two negative counseling statements, and a positive urinalysis report. 3. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 4. The applicant contends he worked to get his rank back and three days before his time was completed; he received orders to clear out in less than 24 hours when the standard was three weeks. There is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. 5. Further, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. 6. The applicant desires to serve in the military again. Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 4. An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 7. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed. 8. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 1 May 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 1 No Change: 4 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) AR20140003729 Page 4 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1