1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 March 2018 b. Date Received: 10 April 2018 c. Counsel: None 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 seeks relief contending, in effect, had mental issues while in the military that affected the conduct and decision making. These issues also had a bearing on the discharge. The applicant is unable to support oneself and family members. The applicant needs an upgrade to honorable to receive proper medical attention and benefits to improve the overall quality of life. The positive urinalysis test was the only incident during the time of service. The applicant was dealing with more than one could back home and slipped up. 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 diagnoses of Cannabis Use. The VA records only contain DoD content. In summary, the applicant does not have 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 1 May 2020, 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: 10 October 2017 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 August 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; he wrongfully used marijuana between (18 April 2017 and 18 May 2017). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 29 August 2017, applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 September 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 November 2013 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 years / HS Graduate / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25V1P, Combat Documentation / Production Specialist / 3 years, 10 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Qatar, 28 July 2015 to 16 January 2016 f. Awards and Decorations: JSAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, GWOTSM, ASR, JMUA g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Positive urinalysis test coded IR (Inspection Random), dated 18 May 2017, for THC. FG Article 15 dated, 26 June 2017, for wrongful use of marijuana, a Schedule I controlled substance, between (18 April 2017 and 18 May 2017); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $799 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days and a written reprimand. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 3 August 2017, revealed that there was no evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through military medical channels. The applicant was mentally responsible, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate intelligently as a respondent in any administrative proceedings. He was psychologically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. The applicant received an initial counseling and several monthly counselings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); JSAM Certificate; JSAM Citation; JMUA Citation; Defense Information School Diploma; Certificate of Achievement; and a Letter of Appreciation. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states in his application since being discharged, he was employed by Target. He has pursued knowledge of nutrition and health; been meditating and practicing mindfulness which has helped him deal with stress. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. 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 Soldier. The applicant, as a Soldier, 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 had mental issues while in the military that affected his conduct and decision making; and these issues also had a bearing on his discharge. The service record contains no evidence of any mental health issues and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant further contends, he is unable to support himself and his family members. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The applicant also contends, he needs an upgrade honorable to receive proper medical attention and benefits to improve his overall quality of life. 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 applicant additionally contends, his positive urinalysis test was the only incident during his time of service. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states 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's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. Lastly, the applicant contends, he was dealing with more than he could back home and slipped up. This contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application. 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 1 May 2020, 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 AR20180008324 1