1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 July 2017 b. Date Received: 31 July 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 effect, is unable to receive deserved educational benefits, explicitly and implicitly. The applicant was discharged for the first and only disciplinary infraction after receiving a FG Article 15. The applicant states the discharge is an inaccurate depiction of service. The Army's policy, which the applicant upheld as an NCO, mandates that the punishment be proportional to the infraction. The applicant tested positive for marijuana in a urinalysis, but was not a habitual offender. The applicant states the narrative reason for discharge reflects Drug Abuse, which subjects the applicant to considerable discrimination for employment. The applicant always maintained a standard of excellence achieving the rank of Sergeant in only three years, serving in Afghanistan as a team leader, and graduating WLC on the Commandant's list. As a result of this mistake, the applicant was punished and lost a career in the military. Aside from punishment, the characterization of discharge is a sufficient recourse for what he did, considering the actions had no effect on job performance. The offense preceded the Vanguard Focus field exercise, wherein the applicant performed duties to a level beyond the assigned grade as a weapons squad leader, a position typically held by a Staff Sergeant, and received accolades for such performance from numerous individuals throughout the chain of command and NCO support channel. The applicant states, the applicant's future is now in jeopardy because of the inability to receive the GI Bill, for which the applicant paid the $1,200, and served honorably for three years as required. Indoctrination of Army rationale hindered the applicant's ability to lobby for mitigation of these circumstances in the midst of the punitive disciplinary action, and humiliation that ensued. One time use of marijuana, understandably is absolutely unacceptable, but does not negate all of the sacrifices to the country, nor does it deem the applicant a social deviant, unworthy of redemption. The applicant further details contentions in a self-authored statement provided with the application. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Cannabis Abuse and an Occupational Problem. Post-service, the applicant does not have a service-connected rating from the VA, but has been diagnosed with Generalized Anxiety Disorder. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 March 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of OBH), and a prior period of honorable service. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), the separation code to JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. (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: 27 July 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: Commander's Report, dated 20 July 2015, reflects the applicant was notified of the initiation separation proceedings under the provisions of AR 635- 200, Chapter 14-12c(2), Misconduct (Drug Abuse), for wrongfully using marijuana on or about 31 January 2015 and on or about 2 March 2015. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 May 2014 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 124 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B10, Infantryman / 4 years, 3 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 12 April 2011 - 11 May 2014 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Afghanistan (9 July 2013 - 19 January 2014) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL. g. Performance Ratings: 1 July 2014 - 23 June 2015 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 25 March 2015, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 16 (marijuana), during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 2 March 2015. Law Enforcement Report - Initial Final, dated 14 May 2015, reflects an investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of Wrongful Use of a Controlled Substance when he submitted a urine specimen on 2 March 2015, during the conduct of a unit urinalysis test, which subsequently tested positive for Tetrahydrocannabinol, the active component in Marijuana. FG Article 15, dated 22 June 2015, for wrongfully using marijuana (2 March 2015). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4; forfeiture of $1,175 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Enlisted Record Brief; self-authored statement; DD Form 2624; and, Commander's Report. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted 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(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, 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 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 would have been protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's contentions about his discharge was a form of punishment was carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. 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. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veteran's 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. 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 applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. 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. 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 that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 March 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of OBH), and a prior period of honorable service. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), the separation code to JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. 10. 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, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20170016451 1