1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 24 March 2017 b. Date Received: 9 June 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, was not afforded the opportunity to seek treatment for drugs after testing positive on a random urinalysis. The applicant was coerced and threatened to accept the current discharge or contest it and receive a bad conduct discharge. The applicant served in the USAR from 1996 to 2004, honorably. The applicant had no history of drug use. Once the applicant was assigned to a unit with bad alcohol and drug component culture, it had just returned from deployment in Iraq and the applicant felt like an outsider-other Soldiers who tested positive were not separated and afforded drug treatment. Once the applicant voiced concerns to the IG and the chaplain, the applicant was threatened. The applicant's experience, having a profound impact, has led to planning on becoming a substance abuse counselor. The applicant has been attending college and plans to work as a counselor to advocate for other Solders, Veterans, and their Families. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 October 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, 27, and 28, contain erroneous entries. In view of the erroneous entries, the Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, c. block 27, reentry code changed to 3, and d. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). (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: 14 November 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 September 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 13 August 2007, he was absent without leave, and remained absent until 5 August 2008. Between 29 July 2008 and 5 August 2008, he wrongfully used cocaine. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 22 September 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 November 2008 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 January 2007 / 6 years, 8 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 8 years, 9 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR (27 January 1996 to 9 July 1996) / NA IADT (10 July 1996 to 15 May 1997) / HD USAR (16 May 1997 to 26 January 2004) / NIF e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: An Electronic Copy of the DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 24 April 2007, indicates the specimen collected on 18 April 2007, on an "IU" (Inspection, Unit) basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for cocaine. DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Actions) show the following changes in duty statuses: dated 3 May 2007, from PDY to AWOL, effective 2 May 2007 dated 16 May 2007, from AWOL to PDY, effective 16 May 2007 dated 2 September 2008, from PDY to Military Confinement, effective 2 September 2008 dated 7 November 2008, from Military Confinement to PDY, effective 14 September 2008 An Electronic Copy of the DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 15 August 2008, indicates the specimen collected on 5 August 2008, on an "CO" (Command Directed or Competence for Duty) basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for cocaine (pages, 9, 28-30 of separation file). Report of Result of Trial with its associates documents indicate the Summary Court-Martial that convened on 2 September 2008, found the applicant guilty of being AWOL on 13 August 2007, and remained absent until 5 August 2008. The sentence consisted of forfeiture of $867 and 15 days of confinement. Negative counseling statements for missing accountability and PT formations on several occasions. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 384 days (AWOL: 2 May 2007 to 15 May 2007, for 14 days; 13 August 2007 to 4 August 2008, for 358 days; and Military Confinement: 2 September 2008 to13 September 2008, for 12 days / Mode of return from AWOL NIF, the latter period, he was released from confinement. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 24 March 2017; college academic transcript; Office of Admissions letter, dated 14 March 2017; and two character reference/supporting letters. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, he has been attending college, and plans to work as a counselor and advocate for other Solders, Veterans, and their families. 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. Paragraph 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. 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, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs and incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. The service record further reflects that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as AR 635-200, paragraph 14- 12c(2), block 26 separation code as "JKK," block 27 reentry code as "4," and block 28, narrative reason for separation as "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)." Therefore and as approved by the separation authority, the following administrative corrections are warranted: a. block 25, separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c; b. block 26, separation code to JKQ; c. block 27, reentry code to 3; and d. block 28, reason for separation to Misconduct (Serious Offense). The record confirms that on 5 August 2008, the applicant was given a command directed urinalysis (CO) and he tested positive for cocaine. Although there is no indication that the command believed the urinalysis was improperly coded "CO," there is reasonable presumption that the unit had a policy to test every Soldier who returned from AWOL status; therefore, such test would be considered a valid inspection and would not be protected by limited use. Further, there is no record the applicant received any punishment under the UCMJ for the positive results. The summary court-martial shows he was charged with and found guilty for the AWOL incident only. If the urinalysis was properly coded CO, as stated on the collection sheet, then the discharge was improperly characterized given the introduction of the limited use evidence in the chapter paperwork. However, the question whether the urinalysis was properly coded is a question of fact for the Army Discharge Review Board to determine given the contrary conclusions that could be drawn by the command's treating the urinalysis as though it was not limited use evidence. The command was either unaware of the implications of the limited use policy or it failed to note in the record the urinalysis was improperly coded. 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 discharge was unjust because he was coerced and threatened, and made to accept his current discharge and if he contested it, he would receive a bad conduct discharge. 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 evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. In consideration of the applicant's post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re- characterization 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 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 26 October 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, 27, and 28, contain erroneous entries. In view of the erroneous entries, the Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, c. block 27, reentry code changed to 3, and d. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Serious Offense) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKQ / RE-3 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 AR20170010311 6