1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 22 September 2017 b. Date Received: 25 September 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, in effect, he was swiftly and harshly discarded by the same military he had previously served so honorably and selflessly. He was discharged for a one-time failed urinalysis. He was suffering from PTSD and additional undiagnosed mental health conditions related to his deployment and divorce at the time he made the poor decision to self-medicate. He was remorseful and has worked tirelessly to keep his life on track after being discarded. He has not been in any trouble with any authorities at any point since his 2002 discharge. There are issues of inequity and impropriety in the way the applicant was separated. His separation was contrary to the terms of the agreement the Command made with the applicant's attorney. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, were reviewed. There is insufficient evidence to determine if the SM had a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. SMs electronic military medical records did not reveal any medical and/or behavioral health conditions. Post-service, SM has not been seen by the VA and does not have a percentage rating. In summary, there is no evidence of a mitigating medical and/or behavioral health/PTSD diagnosis for SMs misconduct of using cocaine. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 October 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, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 September 2002 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 5 August 2002 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; wrongful use of an illegal substance. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 5 August 2002 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 August 2002 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 3 May 2001 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 years / HS Graduate / 120 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist / 4 years, 5 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 1 April 1998 to 2 May 2001 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, NDSM, NOPDR, ASR g. Performance Ratings: February 2001 to January 2002, Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: A positive urinalysis test coded IR (Inspection Random), dated 14 April 2002, for COC. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 18 April 2002, revealed the applicant was referred for psychiatric evaluation in conjunction with separation actions under provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14. There is no evidence of any psychiatric condition which would warrant disposition through medical channels. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. CID Report of Investigation, dated 22 April 2002, relates the applicant was under investigation for wrongful use of cocaine. FG Article 15, dated 27 June 2002, for wrongful use of cocaine, a controlled substance between (7 March 2002 and 14 March 2002); reduction to SPC / E-4, forfeiture of $840 pay for two months (suspended) and extra duty for 30 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); attorney's brief (six pages); Enclosure 1, power of attorney; Enclosure 2, freedom of information act request (six pages); Enclosure 3, statement of facts; Enclosure 4, Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments, Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military Naval records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (four pages); Enclosure 5, prior ADRB Case (AR2003099010, 16 pages); Enclosure 6, honorable discharge certificate, promotion certificate, AGCM, Service School Academic Evaluation Report, NCOER (two pages); Armed Forces Classification Test (AFCT), SGT/SSG Candidates for Promotion Board for April 2002, letter, Disabled American Veterans; Enclosure 7, patient progress report, business card, patient appointments (six pages); Enclosure 8, letter, Social Security Administration; and Enclosure 9, Common Wealth of Puerto Rico, negative criminal record, promotion point worksheet, FLAG, letter, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (five pages). 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. 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 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. 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 14-12c(2), misconduct (drug abuse). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKK" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. 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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a NCO. 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 diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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). The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. The applicant seeks relief contending, he was swiftly and harshly discarded by the same military he had previously served so honorably and selflessly; and his separation was contrary to the terms of the agreement the Command made with the applicant's attorney. 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 applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant further contends, he was discharged for a one-time failed urinalysis. 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 of service. The applicant also contends, he was suffering from PTSD and additional undiagnosed mental health conditions related to his deployment and divorce at the time he made the poor decision to self-medicate. The service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. 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 additionally contends, he was remorseful and has worked tirelessly to keep his life on track after being discarded; and he has not been in any trouble with any authorities at any point since his 2002 discharge. However, these contentions are not matters upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because they raise no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor or they associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. Furthermore, the applicant contends, there are issues of inequity and impropriety in the way the applicant was separated. 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 contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. 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 3 October 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 AR20170017824 1