1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 30 April 2018 b. Date Received: 7 May 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 pertinent part and in effect, made a poor decision while under tremendous stress that led to discharge. The applicant served honorably and lived the Army Values. The applicant paid the full amount into school funds and served with integrity, despite the mishaps during time off. The applicant completed all assignments efficiently, volunteered to lead PT numerous times, and uplifted fellow Soldiers. The applicant applied the Values and owned up to the actions without any excuses. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 14 June 2019, 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: 18 July 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 May 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 23 March 2016, the applicant tested positive for the wrongful use of marijuana, and she was apprehended while attempting to enter a Fort Bragg ECP for possession of marijuana. On 1 December 2015, she committed an assault consummated by batter on another Service member. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 1 June 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 14 June 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 January 2013 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 88 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist / 3 years, 5 months, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM; AGCM; NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 28 March 2016, for unlawfully striking PFC J.W. on the head with a closed fist, striking PFC J.W. on the chest with an open hand, and grabbing PFC J.W. on the head with her hand on 1 December 2015. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3. Negative counseling statements for separation proceedings being initiated for drug possession and a final CID report being received, in which she was the subject of an investigation for possession of THC (page 33 of separation file). Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment, dated 29 March 2016, indicates the unit commander recommended the applicant's enrollment, and that she needed alcohol and/or drug education. An Electronic Copy of the DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 1 April 2016, indicates the specimen collected on 23 March 2016, on a "CO" (Command Directed or Competence for Duty basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for "THC" (page 53 of separation file). FG Article 15, dated 16 May 2016, for wrongfully possessing some amount of marijuana on 23 March 2016 (page 28 of separation file). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $783 pay per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 April 2016, indicates the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by her command. CG Article 15, dated 6 June 2013, for knowingly consuming alcohol beverage while less than 21 years of age on 25 May 2013. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $353, 14 days of extra duty and restriction, and an oral reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), dated 1 May 2018, and three character reference/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): The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By the serious incident of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of her service that ultimately caused her discharge from the Army. 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 she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant's service record contains an electronic copy of DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document for Drug Testing) that shows the urinalysis test was coded CO which indicates "Competence for Duty/Command Direct/Fitness for duty." The Limited Use Policy applies to this test basis, per AR 600-85. However, the evidence of record contains documentary evidence of wrongfully possessing marijuana on 23 March 2016, the date her positive urinalysis was collected, which would have given the unit commander probable cause to direct the urinalysis. In view of the aforementioned, it appears the CO code used on the DD Form 2624 was in all likelihood incorrect and should have been coded PO for "Probable Cause" instead of CO for "Competence for Duty." If this was in fact a harmless error, then the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error on file in this case. Thus the greater weight of the evidence reflects that the 23 March 2016, urinalysis was a probable cause test; thereby, limited use policy was not triggered. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of her service prior to the incidents of misconduct, the Board can find that her complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of her characterization of service. The applicant contends she paid the full amount into her school funds, an indication that indirect, she would like to receive the benefits of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veterans' 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 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. 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 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 14 June 2019, 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 AR20180007476 2