1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 23 February 2018 b. Date Received: 1 August 2018 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, while serving a full three year enlistment in the Army, consistently exceeded the expectations of leaders, peers, and subordinates. The applicant's actions did not go unnoticed and received many official awards for conduct and actions. The applicant states that being an NCO was the greatest feeling in the world and the applicant strived to be the best leader and friend possible to Soldiers and comrades. During the second enlistment, the applicant had one discrepancy, a failed urinalysis for THC, which ruined it all. The applicant is fully aware of accepting responsibility for the mistake and the punishment suffered; served 45 days of extra duty, lost one grade, and received a general discharge. The leaders around the applicant had to take action, but they knew and had told the applicant the one discrepancy was an anomaly, not indicative of total service, and continued to have a high opinion of the applicant as a Soldier. The applicant's Company Commander, who had to oversee the administrative out-processing, wrote a character statement for the applicant. The VA's own procedures and norms are a factor in the nature of the underlying offense and surrounding the circumstances at issue. The applicant states, individual accomplishments and general nature of service should all be favorable factors in the consideration of the case. The applicant wants to better overall life, the community, and the country. The applicant is now working to become a Cybersecurity Professional and is attending SecureSet Academy, using GI Bill education benefits. The eligibility the applicant was granted by the VA has now reportedly been reversed and withdrawn. The applicant believes this recent decision is both unfair and mistaken as to the law and regulations governing eligibility for benefits. The applicant has an honorable discharge for one enlistment and a general discharge for the other enlistment. The applicant believes one does not negate the other and the VA error has left the applicant in the position of paying out of pocket for current vocational training and education. The applicant requests that the VA re-examine the facts and circumstances of the case and quickly restore eligibility so that the applicant may avoid further disruption of education and have a smooth transition to civilian life. 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 the following Behavioral Health diagnoses: Anxiety Disorder Unspecified and Alcohol Abuse. The applicant currently does not have a service-connected rating from the VA. Based on the available information, the applicant does not have a Behavioral Health condition that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 December 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 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 18 December 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 15 November 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between on or about 12 May 2017 and on or about 12 June 2017, he wrongfully used Tetrahydrocannabinol, a schedule I controlled substance. This is in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 21 November 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 December 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 29 October 2015 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS Graduate / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 4 years, 10 months, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: 28 January 2013 - 28 October 2015 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska / None f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-5, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: 1 March 2017 - 28 September 2017 / Not Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 7 July 2017, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 45 (marijuana), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 12 June 2017. FG Article 15, dated 28 September 2017, for wrongfully using tetrahydrocannabinol, a schedule I controlled substance (between 12 May and 12 June 2017). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4; forfeiture of $1,216 pay per month for two months (suspended); and, extra duty for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 November 2017, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; a self-authored statement; Honorable Discharge certificate; Oath of Reenlistment certificate; ten award certificates; training diploma; four DA Forms 638; and three permanent orders. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he is now working to become a Cybersecurity Professional and is attending SecureSet Academy. 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 record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. 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 marred the quality of his service. 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 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 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. The applicant contends that he had good service. 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. The applicant request that the VA reconsider his service and grant him full GI Bill benefits. 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 Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization 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 third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good conduct while serving in the Army; however, though the persons providing the character reference statements were in the applicant's chain of command, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 19 December 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 AR20180007205 1