1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 February 2020 b. Date Received: 28 February 2020 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated use of marijuana. Since that incident he has refrained from all illegal drug use and have no criminal history. His discharge characterization inequitably affects his opportunities for professional growth in his chosen career. His military service outside of this isolated event and his post-military conduct are inconsistent with his current discharge characterization. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 January 2021, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's quality of service and impressive post-service accomplishments. 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), and the separation code to JKN. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 14 July 2010 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 May 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he tested positive for marijuana (6 January 2010); and he was arrested by the military police for shoplifting at the PX (1 December 2009). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 6 May 2010, the applicant waived his right to consult with counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant also waived his right to an administrative separation board, even though he was not entitled to a board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 May 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 April 2009 / 4 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11C10, Indirect Fire Infantryman / 1 year, 6 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The record contains a positive urinalysis test coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 6 January 2010, for THC. The applicant received several negative counseling statements regarding use of illegal drugs. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); self-authored statement (two pages); Exhibit A, support / character statement, Assistant Fire Chief; Exhibit B, DD Form 214; Exhibits C, D F, Certificates of Achievement; Exhibit E, Professional Firefighters Union of Indiana; Exhibits G, H, J, K and L, Board of Firefighting Personnel Standards and Education Requirements; and Exhibit I, Indiana Department Of Homeland Security, Emergency Medical Services Commission, Emergency Medical Technician. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states in a document with his application he pursued a successful career in public service as a professional firefighter. He earned his department's Firefighter of the Year Award, the Life Saving Medal, and successfully completed a wide range of professional certifications. He regularly speaks at schools and retirement homes on the importance of fire safety. As president of his union, he led his cancer awareness program that raises money to support treatment for women suffering from breast cancer. He organized and participated in Brazil City's annual "Hoops for Hope" program where a team of firefighters are pitted against a team of police officers that raised thousands of dollars for Relay for Life and the American Cancer Society's efforts to combat cancer. He also works as a referee and coach for youth basketball games at area YMCAs. 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 states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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. By the documented misconduct (serious offense), the applicant 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 seeks relief contending, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated use of marijuana. However, the service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant further contends, since that incident he has refrained from all illegal drug use and have no criminal history. The applicant is to be commended for his effort. However, 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 also contends, his discharge characterization inequitably affects his opportunities for professional growth in his chosen career. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The applicant additionally contends, his military service outside of this isolated event and his post-military conduct are inconsistent with his current discharge characterization. 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's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with 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 6 January 2021, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's quality of service and impressive post-service accomplishments. 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), and the separation code to JKN. 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 / 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 AR20200005149 1