IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 June 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20140004795 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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, that he was not afforded a proper opportunity to fully participate in the Alcohol Substance Abuse Program (ASAP). He did a self-enrollment into the program, and through no fault of his own, he was not allowed to complete the program. He is requesting that his discharge be upgraded to honorable, so that he can have access to his Montgomery GI Bill. He is presently attending school full-time at his own expense. He has filed a VA service-connected claim for PTSD and is being evaluated for the VA’s PTSD program. He believes that he was self-medicating with marijuana after his deployment from Afghanistan. He has taken responsibility for his actions. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 10 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 8 June 2012 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14 Paragraph 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: Rear Detachment, 3-509th Infantry, 4th BCT, 25th Infantry Division, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson AK f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 10 August 2010, 4 years and 16 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 9 months, 29 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 4 months, 1 day i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: USAR 100408-100809/NA k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman m. GT Score: 113 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA, Alaska p. Combat Service: Afghanistan dates (NIF) q. Decorations/Awards: ACM-CS, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: None u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 August 2010 for a period of 4 years and 16 weeks. He was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He served in Alaska and served one combat tour in Afghanistan; however the dates the applicant served in Afghanistan is not in the record. He earned an ACM-CS. He was serving at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, AK at the time of his discharge. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. On 18 April 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs for wrongfully using marijuana. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 23 April 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted 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 of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 10 May 2012, 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 8 June 2012, for misconduct (drug abuse), under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), with an SPD Code of JKK, and an RE code of 4. 6. The applicant’s 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 coded: IR, Inspection Random, dated 16 November 2011, for marijuana. 2. Article 15, dated 6 March 2012, for wrongfully using marijuana (111017-111116). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $745.00 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG). 3. DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 8 March 2012. The applicant was screened and cleared for administrative separation under AR 635-200, Chapter 14. The applicant was screened for PTSD and TBI, in which he was determined to be negative for both disorders. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 3 April 2014, and a DD Form 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states that he is currently attending school full-time at his own expense. 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 service record and the issue 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 for violation 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 he was not afforded a proper opportunity to fully participate in ASAP. He states that he did self-enroll into the program, but through no fault of his own he was not allowed to complete the program. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support this contention. 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 contention. 5. AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier. 6. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his 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. 7. The applicant contends that he was self-medicating with marijuana after deployment because of PTSD. However, the service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant was screened for PTSD and TBI on 8 March 2012, by competent medical authority in which he was determined to be negative for both disorders. 8. 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. 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: Records Review Date: 4 June 2014 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? No Counsel: None 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: No Change Change RE Code to: No Change 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) AR20140004795 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1