IN THE CASE OF: Ms. BOARD DATE: 11 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140004543 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 her general, under honorable conditions discharge characterization to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, an upgrade of her discharge will allow her to return to school and get her life back on track. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 10 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 3 April 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: 61st CBRN Company, 23d CBRN Battalion, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 7 June 2010 / 3 years, 21 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 9 months, 27 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 9 months, 27 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist m. GT Score: 97 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR 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 7 June 2010, for a period of 3 years and 21 weeks. She was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. She completed 1 year, 9 months, and 27 days of active duty service. When her discharge proceedings were initiated, she was serving at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 1 February 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), by reason misconduct (drug abuse); specifically for the testing positive for amphetamines and ecstasy on 1 August 2011. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 27 February 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted a statement on her own behalf. In her statement, the applicant stated she lost two very important people in her life and that she was in an unhealthy relationship. She further stated that she contemplated suicide; however, after informing her leadership of her suicidal thoughts, she received mental and drug counseling. 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 an unknown date, 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 3 April 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), for misconduct (drug abuse), 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. There is one positive urinalysis report contained in the record: IU, Inspection Unit, 1 August 2011, dextroamphetamines, methamphetamines, methylenedioxyamphetamines, and methylenedioxymethamphetamine (“ecstasy”) 2. An Article 15, dated 6 October 2011, for wrongfully using dextroamphetamines, methamphetamines, methylenedioxyamphetamine, and methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy) (110728-110801). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $733.00 pay per month for two months, $433.00 pay per month for one month (suspended), and $733.00 pay per month (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG). 3. One negative counseling statement, dated 20 August 2011, for wrongful use of a controlled substance, failure to obey orders, and recommendation for UCMJ action. 4. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 10 January 2012, reflects that the applicant had a clear and normal thought process and was mentally responsible. 5. Two letters of appeal on behalf of the applicant, dated 3 March 2012, written by the applicant’s squad leader and team leader. Both NCOs stated that the applicant always performed her job, heavily relied on to accomplish the mission, she was a team player, and a good Soldier. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 24 February 2014, 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 her discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, her 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 that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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 of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15 for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 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 an upgrade of her discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, 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. 5. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 6. 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: 11 March 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) AR20140004543 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1