IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 September 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20140012622 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 his general, under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, the reason he is requesting an upgrade is so that he can continue his education. The justification is reason for the discharge, and the use of a substance was created from a poor mental health disorder. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 10 July 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 17 July 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: Headquarters & Headquarters Company, 1-1 Brigade Special Troops Battalion, 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, KS f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 27 June 2011, 4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 21 days h. Total Service: 2 years, 21 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 25U10, Signal Support System Specialist m. GT Score: 112 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 June 2011, for a period of 4 years. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He earned an AAM and completed 2 years and 21 days of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. On 28 May 2013, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2), by reason of misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs; specifically for: wrongfully smoking marijuana. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 6 June 2013, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not 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 18 June 2013, 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 separated on 17 July 2013, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2), with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, 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 are two positive urinalysis reports contained in the record: IO, Inspection Other, dated 25 January 2013, Marijuana IR, Inspection Random, dated 7 January 2013, Discrepancy 2. Article 15, dated 4 March 2013, for wrongfully using marijuana between on or about (130204-130225). The punishment imposed consisted of reduction to the grade of Private (E-1), forfeiture of $758.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction for 60 days (FG). 3. One negative counseling statement dated 12 February 2013, for testing positive for marijuana and to initiate separation action for commission of a serious offense. 4. A DA Form 2823 Sworn Statement dated 13 February 2013, from the applicant indicating he was in the car with his friend and got a contact high. 5. A Mental Status Evaluation dated 7 March 2013, which shows the applicant was diagnosed; Axis I: major depression single episode, moderate; Axis II: no diagnosis; Axis III: the applicant denied any medical conditions. The applicant was screened for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and scored 4/4 for positive and was referred for a comprehensive PTSD evaluation. The applicant was cleared for administrative separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c from the behavioral health perspective. 6. A DA Form 8003, (Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment) dated 12 February 2013, in which the applicant was command referred due to his unexcused absences, positive UA and his sporadic work habit. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a copy of his Chronological Record of Medical Care dated 17-30 April 2013, and a copy of his Mental Status Evaluation dated 7 March 2013. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any 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, 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 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 multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and a negative counseling statement. 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 the reason he is requesting an upgrade is the justification is reason for the discharge, and the use of a substance was created from a poor mental health disorder. The applicant’s service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); however, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 5. The record shows that on 7 March 2013, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong and was cleared for administrative separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c from the behavioral health perspective. It appears the applicant’s chain of command determined that although he was suffering from PTSD, he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. Further, there are many Soldiers with the same condition that completed their military service successfully. 6. The applicant further contends he would like to continue his education. 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 records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 8. 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: 24 September 2014 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) AR20140012622 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1