1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 March 2017 b. Date Received: 23 March 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, during two enlistments, the applicant served one as an Armored Crewman and one as an Air Traffic Controller. The applicant served 10 years and 11 months and received a general discharge due to one isolated incident. As a Soldier and NCO, the applicant was dedicated to making the environment proactive for accomplishing the mission while training and leading Soldiers. The applicant believes that multiple awards and deployments credited on the DD Form 214 and ERB will testify to these accomplishments. The applicant states making one mistake during a tough personal period of a career and fully accepted the consequences of these actions. Since discharge was related to the use of an illegal substance, the applicant would never have been a drug user and remains substance free to this day. The applicant's incident was just one momentary lapse in judgment and had no prior history or ongoing issues with substance abuse. Since discharge, the applicant worked in the oil industry and took multiple drug and alcohol tests through DISA Global Solutions. The applicant currently works in Afghanistan with DynCorp International, as an Air Traffic Control Supervisor, which requires Federal Aviation Association (FAA) yearly Flight Physicals, which screen for multiple illegal substances. The applicant states, the truth is that the only reason for not submitting a DD Form 293 earlier, is because the applicant wanted to show that the incident which led to discharge was a single occurrence and not a trend. The applicant's desire is that this submission with supporting documents and clean record are sufficient for the Board to grant relief, which will allow the applicant to continue service to the country in the best means possible. 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 (Drug Abuse) / AR 635- 200 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 14 June 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 9 April 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He failed to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully submitting an adulterated urine specimen during a unit urinalysis; and, he wrongfully used cocaine, a schedule II controlled substance. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 15 April 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 15 April 2014, the applicant conditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) discharge. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 May 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 February 2013 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 36 / Bachelor's Degree / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 15Q20, Air Traffic Control Operator / 11 years, 2 months, 19 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 10 August 1995 - 9 August 1998 / HD (Break in Service) RA, 12 July 2006 - 26 February 2008 / HD RA, 27 February 2008 - 26 February 2013 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (20 September 2009 - 9 November 2010 / 26 February 2012 - 15 July 2013), Iraq (8 September 2007 - 3 December 2008) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, BSM, ARCOM-4, AAM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 1April 2012 - 31 March 2013 / Fully Capable 1 April 2013 - 28 January 2014 / Marginal 29 January 2014 - 13 June 2014 / Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CID Report of Investigation - Initial Final, dated 5 February 2014, reflects an investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of Failure to Obey Order or Regulation, when he submitted and adulterated urine specimen. Further investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of Wrongful Use of a Controlled Substance when he admitted he used Cocaine. FG Article 15, dated 28 February 2014, for wrongfully submitting an adulterated urine specimen during a unit urinalysis (10 December 2013); and, for wrongfully using cocaine (between 6 and 10 December 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-5; and, extra duty for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 28 March 2014, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; criminal background check; two Medical Certificates; Pre-employment drug test; and, an employment offer letter. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states that he has remained drug free and has obtained employment. 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, misconduct (drug abuse). National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service 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 a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment 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 characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors 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. Caution shall be exercised 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 narrative reason change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant, as a NCO, 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. 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 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 contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635- 200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)," and the separation code is "JKK." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends that he was having personal issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends the event that caused his discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a three combat tours. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 AR20170004223 1