IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 11 February 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140004768 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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, during the time leading up to his discharge, he had just returned from deployment. He was assigned to the honors platoon, had conducted 26 funerals in six months, was going to court repeatedly with his child’s mother, and his great aunt had passed away, which affected him greatly. He states, he fell into a state of depression and began using spice to cope. He notified his First Sergeant of his depression and spice use and was enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP). He was informed by his child’s mother that his visitation rights had been revoked because he missed a court hearing and this caused him to fall back into depression and begin using spice, despite having a weekly urinalysis test. He tested positive while in ASAP and was recommended for separation by his unit commander. He states, he regrets the choices and decisions he made however, he would like to move forward with his life. The applicant did not present any issue of propriety or equity for the Board to consider. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 10 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 1 March 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Drug Rehabilitation Failure, AR 635-200, Chapter 9, JPC, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: 82nd Airborne Signal Brigade, Fort Bragg, NC f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 14 January 2009/4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 1 month, 18 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 1 month, 18 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 25U1P, Signal Support Systems Specialist m. GT Score: NIF n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (091223-101221) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTEM, ASR, OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 January 2009, for a period of 4 years. He was 22 years old at the time of entry and had a General Equivalency Diploma (GED). He served in Afghanistan, earned an ARCOM and completed 3 years, 1 month, 18 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Bragg, NC. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214, which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. 2. The DD Form 214 indicates that on 1 March 2012, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, as drug rehabilitation failure, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JPC and a reentry (RE) code of 4. 3. The applicant’s available record does not show any recorded actions under the UCMJ, unauthorized absences or time lost. However, he was separated as a PVT/E-1 and the action that caused his reduction is not contained in the service record. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: DD Form 214 covering the period of service 14 January 2009 through 1 March 2012. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 1 March 2014, a self-authored statement, dated 4 March 2014, a letter of support, dated 25 February 2014, Orders Number 047-0274, dated 16 February 2012, Discharge Instructions, dated 27 February 2012, 3 January 2012, DA Form 3822, dated 27 February 2012 and 3 January 2012, a physical profile, dated 26 February 2012 and 3 January 2012, allied medical documents, and a DD Form 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any in support of his application. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. 2. A member who has been referred to the ASAP for alcohol or drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. 3. Army policy states that an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service. However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process. 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 military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, there were insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. The only pertinent evidence available for review regarding the applicant's discharge is the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which was authenticated by the applicant. The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, for drug rehabilitation failure. 3. For this type of discharge, the applicant would have been enrolled in ASAP and would have been aware of the consequences of any action which would demonstrate any inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program. Inasmuch as the applicant's official record is void of the circumstances leading to his discharge, it is presumed that he was identified as a rehabilitation failure subsequent to his enrollment in the ASAP program. Therefore, it is also presumed that the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems, and chose not to avail himself of this opportunity. 4. The applicant contends that he was having family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be 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. There is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. 5. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record. 6. Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 11 February 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) AR20140004768 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1