1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 March 2018 b. Date Received: 12 April 2018 c. Counsel: 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, the current discharge does not accurately reflect the entire time in service-the discharge was unfair, unjust, and unwarranted. The most egregious allegation refers to an alleged wrongful use of steroids incident that was grossly exaggerated by the chain of command. The applicant takes full responsibility for the actions, knowing that steroids are dangerous drugs that put the applicant's health at risk. However, the discharge does not portray the accomplishments or character. The applicant accomplished SOPC (Special Operations Prep Course), Airborne, a hard-fought deployment in Afghanistan's most dangerous province, earned an EIB (Expert Infantry Badge), and 75 percent of one of the most academically challenging schools in the military, EOD. The applicant was an intelligent, motivated, and capable Soldier, who was wrongly discharged, just so a new commander could have a clean slate. Although the applicant submitted to a urinalysis test specifically for steroids, the applicant was never informed of the results of the urinalysis, nor did the applicant receive a copy of the Article 15 and its allied documents that was initially read on 8 June 2010. In mid-August, the applicant was informed of separation, but the "Election of Rights" was never explained. The applicant was never counseled or given the opportunity to contest the separation or provided rehabilitation to address the issues for ongoing health. Despite all violations of rules and regulations pertaining to the separation, the separation authority signed a decision for the applicant to be retained. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 August 2019, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat 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, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 5 November 2010 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: In an undated memorandum / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 30 March 2005 / 7 years, 3 months (extended his 6-year enlistment by 15 months on 4 June 2009) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 114 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 5 years, 7 months, 6 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (21 January 2007 to 11 April 2008) f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM; ACM-CS; ASR; OSR; CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: 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 6 March 2018; applicant's petition; FG Article 15, dated 17 June 2010, with punishment worksheet; incomplete election of rights response; two applicant's counsel letters, dated 12 May 2016, and 10 May 2016; National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) letter, dated 27 July 2016; DD Form 214; enlistment documents; ERB; separation file; two Reports of Medical Examination, dated 21 February 2004, and 24 November 2008; Request Pertaining to Military Records; VA letters, dated 27 April 2017, and 15 June 2016; Report of Medical History, dated 20 October 2008; voluminous medical and dental records; and three character reference and supporting statements. 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(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, paragraph 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): he applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. After carefully examining the applicant's available military records, there are insufficient mitigating factors to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service or the merit of his issues. The applicant's record is void of the documentary evidence 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 not authenticated by the applicant's signature and the separation authority's decision memorandum. 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. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., a complete copy of his separation file), for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record and the applicant did not provide either information. The applicant's numerous contentions that made his discharge was unfair, unjust, and unwarranted were carefully considered. Apart from an incomplete separation file, 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 sufficient evidence to support the contention that he was 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 sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. Insofar as the applicant's contentions that he was never provided rehabilitative assistance to address his issues, AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier. Further, AR 600-85, paragraph 3-8 entitled self-referrals, states the applicant could have self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) counseling center for assistance. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to these incidents, the Board can find that his accomplishments and complete period of service were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance and character. However, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 August 2019, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat 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 AR20180005738 1