1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 29 November 2016 b. Date Received: 2 December 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the applicant did not deserve to be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. It was a proud moment after joining the Army. When the applicant got to the permanent duty station, the applicant developed some habits that led to addictions. The applicant is not proud of this, believing one should have been a leader and not a follower. The applicant contends receiving no help for any of the issues, but did receive harassment and ridicule. The applicant was forced out by the chain of command and the First Sergeant did not want garbage in the unit. The applicant was given two Article 15's for the same urinalysis. The applicant went to JAG after reviewing the case and wanted to start an investigation, but the applicant denied out of fear and not knowing what would happen since the First Sergeant already had threatened the applicant if the applicant did not leave quietly. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 December 2018, 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 / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 11 December 2001 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 5 November 2001 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for wrongful use of cocaine, making false official statement, missing movement, disrespect to an NCO, AWOL, and numerous FTR's. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 November 2001 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 November 2001 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 January 2000 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 13B1P, Cannon Crewmember / 1 year, 10 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summarized Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 7 February 2001, for making to 1SG R.J., an official statement, which statement was totally false, and was then known by him to be so false on 30 January 2001. The punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction for 14 days. CG Article 15, dated 11 May 2001, for being disrespectful in deportment toward SSG C.M.M. Jr, a noncommissioned officer, by walking away from him and shaking his head while he was speaking to him on 27 April 2001 and failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x 4 (27 April 2001 x 3 and 28 April 2001). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $272 pay per month for one month (suspended), and extra duty for 14 days Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 14 August 2001, reflects the applicant tested positive for Cocaine 197 during a command direct (CD) urinalysis testing conducted on 6 August 2001. FG Article 15, dated 20 August 2001, for missing movement 21 July 2001 and for being AWOL 21 July 2001 until his return on 5 August 2001. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $584 pay per month for two months, and extra duty for 45 days. Record of Trail by Summary Court-Martial, dated 18 September 2001, for going AWOL. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of 2/3 pay per month for one month and confinement for 29 days. Negative counseling statements for various actions of misconduct and performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and self-authored statement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his 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. 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 a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. 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. It should be noted the applicant's service record contains a DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document for Drug Testing) that shows the urinalysis test was coded CD which indicates "Competence for Duty/Command Direct/Fitness for duty." The Limited Use Policy applies to this test basis, per AR 600-85. However, evidence in the record shows the applicant was tested on 6 August 2001, the day after returning from being AWOL 21 July 2001 until 5 August 2001. It appears the unit may have had a policy as Soldier would be tested for drugs after returning from a period of AWOL. This would have given the unit commander probable cause to direct the urinalysis. In view of the aforementioned, it appears the CD code used on the DD Form 2624 was in all likelihood incorrect and should have been coded PO for "Probable Cause" instead of CD for "Competence for Duty." If this was in fact a harmless error, then the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error on file in this case. The evidence in the record did not create a substantial doubt that the discharge would have been any different if the error had not been made. The applicant seeks relief contending that he did not deserve to be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. It was a proud moment when he joined the Army. When he got to his permanent duty station he developed some habits that lead to addictions. He is not proud of this, believing he should have been a leader not a follower. He contends he received no help for any of these issues only thing he did receive was harassment and ridicule. He was forced out by his chain of command, the first sergeant did not was garbage in his unit. The applicant contends he was given two Article 15's for the same urinalysis. He went to JAG after reviewing his case, they wanted to start an investigation but he denied out of fear he did not know what would happen since his first sergeant already had threatened him if he did not leave quietly. The applicant's contentions were noted; 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 this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was harassed and ridiculed by his chain of command. In fact, the applicant's Summary Court-Martial, two Articles 15, and numerous negative counseling statements justify a pattern of misconduct. The applicant's statements alone does not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. The evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non- judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts which resulted in the initiation of separation actions. Also, 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. Further, AR 600-85, paragraph 3-8 entitled self- referrals, states the applicant could have self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) counseling center for assistance. 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. 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 12 December 2018, 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 Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code 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 AR20170001920 1