1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 April 2018 b. Date Received: 26 April 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was handled in an inequitable and improper manner by not allowing due process. The command failed to follow discharge regulations in which the applicant received an under other than honorable discharge due to a command directed urinalysis. The command did not follow constitutional requirements, which led to a due process error. The applicant is completely aware of the transgressions, however, the findings of the investigation, by any means do not reflect the applicant's character. The applicant believes there were mitigating circumstances surrounding the problems that led to this discharge, which were not taken into full consideration and given a fair opportunity to be addressed. The applicant has well documented medical problems that kept the applicant from performing duties properly. The applicant states, it is well documented that the applicant was pending a medical board for up to one year prior to any investigation being conducted for any violations. Since discharge, the applicant has been a very productive, law abiding citizen, a mother of three, a wife of 15 years and a nonprofit owner of UNeque Inspirations Food Pantry and will continue to serve the community for needy families. The applicant requests that the Board reconsider the discharge and grant an upgrade. 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 no available records on the applicant due to the period of service. In summary, there is insufficient evidence to determine if 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 22 May 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, post-service accomplishments, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635- 200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 9 February 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 17 December 2003, the applicant was charged with violating Article 112a, UCMJ, for on or about 16 and 17 November 2003, wrongfully used cocaine, a controlled substance. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 19 December 2003 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 16 January 2004 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 July 2000 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91J10, Medical Supply Specialist / 3 years, 6 months, 9 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge sheet as described in previous paragraph 3c. FG Article 15, dated 23 September 2003, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 29 June and 18 July 2003). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $645 pay per month for two months (one month suspended); and, extra duty for 45 days. CID Report of Investigation - Initial Final, dated 21 November 2003, reflects an investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of Wrongful Use of a Controlled Substance when she submitted a urine specimen on 4 November 2003, during the conduct of a unit urinalysis test, which subsequently tested positive for cocaine. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DA Form 705; DD Form 214; DD Form 293; self-authored statement; three third party statements; Team Member Performance Review; Acknowledgment and Notification and Counseling; medical records; Certificate of Incorporation and allied documents; and, IRS letter. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, she has been a very productive, law abiding citizen, a mother of three, a wife of 15 years and a nonprofit owner of UNeque Inspirations Food Pantry. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and she indicated she understood she could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. Her record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of discharge. The applicant contends that she was not given proper due process in the discharge process. However, 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. The applicant contends she should have been medically discharged; however, Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. 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. 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. 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 22 May 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, post-service accomplishments, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20180007276 1