1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 2 June 2015 b. Date Received: 8 June 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was unjustified and unfitting for a single, one time, incident and not a reoccurring abusive manner. When the incident happened he was under the influence of alcohol and he does not remember ingesting anything. The applicant states that his outstanding career was put on hold and separation proceedings began immediately after failing a urinalysis. In addition, he was placed in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) where it was determined that he did have an alcohol dependency issue; however, nothing about illegal drugs. The applicant believes the discharge he received was not equal fitting for his entire career to be thrown away and given "drug abuse" as a narrative reason for separation for a one time incident. Since his discharge, the applicant states that he has matured and believes his discharge should be upgraded based on the Soldier’s Creed and Warrior Ethos, “I Will Never Leave a Fallen Comrade." On 19 March 2014, the applicant contends that he was left behind his comrades because of a single incident. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had no mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses. Electronic medical records revealed diagnosis of an Adjustment Disorder, which does not explain or directly mitigate positive urinalysis of Xanax. MSE from December 2013 revealed a diagnosis of Alcohol Abuse in which the applicant was psychiatrically cleared. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 August 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 19 March 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 March 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant wrongfully used alprazolam (AHAL), a schedule IV controlled substance (between on or about 14 October 2013 and 13 November 2013). (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 March 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: Undated / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 12 November 2008 / 5 years and 34 weeks b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 91 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-5 / 25B10, IT Specialist / 5 years, 4 months, and 8 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA, Germany / Kuwait (5 November 2011 – 4 November 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-4, ASUA, AGCM, NDSM, GWTSM, NOPDR, ASR, OSR-2, MOVSM g. Performance Ratings: 1 January 2013 – 9 August 2013, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 9 August 2013, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty (21 March 2013 and 18 Jun 2013), disobeying a senior noncommissioned (27 March 2013 and 25 May 2013), dereliction of duty (2 July 2013), and disobeying a lawful order (25 May 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $1,152.00 pay, extra duty and restriction for 45 days, and an oral reprimand. Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 4 December 2013, reflects the applicant tested positive for alprazolam during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing conducted on 13 November 2013. FG Article 15, dated 10 January 2014, for wrongfully using alprazolam, a schedule IV controlled substance (between 14 October 2013 and 13 November 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $765.00 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. CID Report, dated 12 December 2013, shows the applicant was the subject of an investigation for the wrongful use of Xanax (alprazolam). Several DA Forms 4856 (Developmental Counseling), dated between 21 March 2012 and 10 December 2013, for failure to follow instruction, sleeping while on duty, disrespect of a senior noncommissioned officer, failure to report to PT formation on several occasions, conduct unbecoming of a noncommissioned officer, disobeying a lawful order (fraternization and drinking with Soldiers), and testing positive on a urinalysis test. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Statues Evaluation, dated 13 December 2013, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) for Alcohol Abuse, rule out dependence. It was determined the applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings. Applicant did not have a BH condition that warrant disposition through medical channels and was psychiatrically cleared for chapter separation. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 2 June 2015; DD Form 214; and an ASAP Outpatient Aftercare Plan, dated 14 March 2014. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): 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. Paragraph 14-12c(2) terms abuse of illegal drugs as serious misconduct. It continues; however, by recognizing relevant facts may mitigate the nature of the offense. Therefore, a single drug abuse offense may be combined with one or more minor disciplinary infractions or incidents of other misconduct and processed for separation under paragraph 14-12a or 14-12b as appropriate. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKK" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), Misconduct (Drug Abuse). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKK" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members’ discharges. “Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre-existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service.” “Conditions documented in the record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which PTSD or PTSD related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Correction Boards will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct.” 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. 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, 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 marred the quality of his service. Furthermore, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, the applicant 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 appropriate SPD code and narrative reason to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged for misconduct (drug abuse) is “JKK” and the RE code is 4. The regulation further stipulates no deviation is authorized. 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. The applicant contends that his discharge was unjustified and unfitting for a single, one time, incident and not a reoccurring abusive manner. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. In addition, military orders to produce a urine sample have been upheld in court as both legal and lawful and essential to military discipline. The applicant contends that since his discharge, he has matured. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The applicant further contends that his discharge should be upgraded based on the Soldier’s Creed and Warrior Ethos, “I Will Never Leave a Fallen Comrade," which he believes happened because of a single incident. However, the issue the applicant submitted is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. Also by regulation, an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct (drug abuse). It appears the applicant’s generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a general (under honorable conditions) discharge (GD) instead of the normal UOTHC discharge. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 August 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214/Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: 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 BH – Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150009867 1