1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 September 2016 b. Date Received: 2 September 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident in his 44 months of service with no other adverse action. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 March 2017, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, his personal testimony, and his post service accomplishments, as stated in the case report and directive, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changes to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), the separation code to JKN, and the reentry eligibility RE code to 3. (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: 20 November 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 February 2009 / 4 years, 3 months, 18 weeks (extended 3 months on 5 July 2010) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 3 years, 8 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Afghanistan (7 April 2011 to 28 March 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Discharge Orders, dated 8 November 2012 i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; two character/supporting statements; and two certificates of training completion. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant completed a Personal Trainer Course and became a certified personal trainer. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), by reason of Misconduct (Drug Abuse), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 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, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant's contentions were carefully reviewed. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career. 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. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's character and performance. They all recognize his good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. The applicant's supporting statement also rendered their support for an upgrade so that he may have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities or to obtain veterans' benefits. Further, eligibility for veterans' 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. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to any incidents of misconduct that may have led to his discharge, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. Based on the available record, 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional documents: Recommendation from Mr. B.A. - 1 page Recommendation from Mr. G.V. - 1 page b. The applicant presented no additional contentions. c. Observers: Ms. Octilia Lara - (Friend) 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 March 2017, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, his personal testimony, and his post service accomplishments, as stated in the case report and directive, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changes to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), the separation code to JKN, and the reentry eligibility RE code to 3. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a e. Change SPD/RE Code to: Change SPD to JKN / Change the RE code to 3 f. Restore Grade to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer 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 NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160015520 1