1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 7 August 2017 b. Date Received: 11 August 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, an upgrade would provide VA medical benefits. It, also, would not look bad on a job application. The applicant was young with addiction issues at the time, however, has been clean and sober for two years now. The applicant is helping other veterans in the Alcoholics Anonymous Program. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 March 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was improper. The record shows the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test which was coded CO (Command Directed or Competence for Duty). This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85 and are protected evidence because the CO coded test was administered as part of the applicant's rehabilitation program. Use of these information mandate award of an honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board found the reason for the discharge was proper and equitable, and the Board voted not to change it. However, notwithstanding the Board finding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board further found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, and 28, contained 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, and c. 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 / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 2 February 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 December 2003 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He tested positive for cocaine, a controlled substance, on two separate urinalyses. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 27 January 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: Unconditionally waived, 27 January 2004 (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 January 2004 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 October 2001 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 102 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 31B10, Military Police / 2 years, 3 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 12 November 2002, indicates the specimen collected on 4 November 2002, on an "IR" (Inspection, Random) basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for "Cocaine." Negative counseling statements for implementing his FG Article 15 punishments of extra duty and restriction; violating medical quarantine; and having a positive urinalysis for cocaine on two separate occasions. FG Article 15, dated 12 December 2002, for wrongfully using cocaine on 4 November 2002. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $552, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Previous administrative proceedings with an administrative separation board making a recommendation for retention in the US Army on 5 August 2003, indicates the GCMCA approved the board's findings and recommendation on 17 September 2003, and the applicant was retained. DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 9 September 2003, indicates the specimen collected on 2 September 2003, on an "CO" (Command Directed or Competence) basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for "Cocaine." (Pages 28 and 29) FG Article 15, dated 9 October 2003, for wrongfully using cocaine between 3 August 2003 and 2 September 2003. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $575 pay per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty, and 30 days of restriction. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 7 August 2017. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). After a careful review of all the applicant's military records and the issues submitted with the application, the characterization of service appears to be improper. The record shows that on 2 September 2003, the applicant was given a "Competence for Duty or Command Directed" (CO) urinalysis and he tested positive for cocaine. This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85 and is protected evidence. Use of this information also mandates award of an honorable characterization of service. There is no indication in the separation file that the command recognized that the "CO" code could not be used as the basis for the separation and the Article 15. Moreover, there is no indication the command believed the urinalysis was improperly coded, and there is also no CID report and no counseling statement that provide basis for the urinalysis test. 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. Accordingly, the use of the test basis for the urinalysis being coded "CO," indicates the Article 15 was improper based on the limited use evidence, and the discharge was improperly characterized given the introduction of the limited use evidence in the Chapter paperwork. There is no indication in the Chapter paperwork that the command recognized that the "CO" code could not be used as the basis for the Article 15. Moreover, there is no indication the command believed the urinalysis was improperly coded and there is also no CID report or counseling statements that shed any light on the reason the urinalysis was authorized. The applicant contends an upgrade would provide him veterans' medical benefits and better job opportunities. However, 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. Further, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The applicant contends that he was young with an addiction problem at the time of the discharge. 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 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," and block 28, narrative reason for separation as "Misconduct." Therefore, 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; and c. block 28, reason for separation to Misconduct (Serious Offense). The discharge was not consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was not within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was not provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 March 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was improper. The record shows the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test which was coded CO (Command Directed or Competence for Duty). This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85 and are protected evidence because the CO coded test was administered as part of the applicant's rehabilitation program. Use of these information mandate award of an honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board found the reason for the discharge was proper and equitable, and the Board voted not to change it. However, notwithstanding the Board finding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board further found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, and 28, contained 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, and c. 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: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Serious Offense) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12C e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKQ / 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 AR20170012363 1