1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 5 November 2015 b. Date Received: 14 December 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to received healthcare from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The applicant contends his discharge was the result of his addiction to prescribed medication which started after his testicular and back injuries. He is ashamed and sorry for his action that he committed. His four years were served with honor and integrity and he believes his love for the Army was proven when he chose a medical reclassification instead of a medical discharge and disability. He believes his time in service was the best years of his life until his addiction to medication. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for most but not all (false urine) of the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. A limited review through the JLV (Joint Legacy Viewer) of the applicant's Veterans Affairs records notes 34 problems (five VA entered) including PTSD, Anxiety, chronic pain syndrome, varicocele, hearing loss and others. The Veterans Affairs has not service-connected the applicant. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 June 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. prescription medication induced opioid addiction), 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 reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (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: 30 June 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date Charges Were Preferred: 17 May 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) which indicated on 17 May 2011, the applicant was charged with the following charges: on divers occasions, he failed to go at the time prescribe to his appointed place of duty between 22 March 2011 and 20 April 2011; having received a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer not to leave the battalion area of operations or words to that effect, willfully disobeyed the same between, 30 March 2011 and 21 April 2011; having received a lawful order from his First Sergeant to report to extra duty willfully disobeyed the same on 22 March 2011 and 13 April 2011; violated a lawful general regulation by wrongfully possessing drug paraphernalia (hypodermic needle) on 22 March 2011; and wrongfully used Oxycodone, a Schedule II controlled substance between 22 March 2011 and 21 April 2011. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 1 June 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 June 2011 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 October 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 13B1P, Cannon Crewmember / 4 years, 7 months, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 25 September 2006 to 26 October 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (26 January 2009 to 23 January 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 7 March 2011, for disobeying a lawful order from his superior commissioned officer to not discuss the incident he was under investigation for, to wear a serviceable uniform, and to not leave the CQ area without approval, or words to that affect, willfully disobeyed the same on 17 February 2011, violated a lawful general regulation by wrongfully using urine from a container, and not urine from his own body, to fil a specimen bottle during a lawful drug test on 16 February 2011, and wrongfully used heroin and oxymorphone on 16 February 2011. The punishment consisted of reduction toe E-4; forfeiture of $1,115.00 pay per month for two months, and 45 days extra duty and restriction. Memorandum from the applicant's primary care provider, dated 25 February 2011, makes reference to his drug addiction and addiction to opioids. Memorandum of record makes reference to: "Record of Military Occupational Specialty/Medical Retention Board (MMRB) Proceedings Pre-trial Confinement documents to include confinement orders and checklist. The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance counseling. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Confined by military authority for 40 days from (1 May 2011 to 9 June 2011), the applicant returned to his unit j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 11 April 2011, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for an opioid dependence. It was noted that the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong and possessed sufficient mental capacity. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command including chapter separation. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Enlisted Record Brief; memorandum for pre-trial confinement; and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for 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. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members' discharges. "Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre- existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service." "Conditions documented in the record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which PTSD or PTSD related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Correction Boards will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of and offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant seeks relief contending his discharge was the result of his addiction to prescribed medication which started after his testicular and back injuries. He is ashamed and sorry for his action that he committed. His four years were served with honor and integrity and he believes his love for the Army was proven when he chose a medical reclassification instead of a medical discharge and disability. He believes his time in service was the best years of his life until his addiction to medication. 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 and the applicant is to be commended for his service. However, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. Furthermore, AR 600-85, paragraph 3-8 entitled self-referrals, states the applicant could have self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) counseling center for assistance. He had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to receive healthcare from the Department of Veterans Affairs. However, 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 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 21 June 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. prescription medication induced opioid addiction), 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 reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it 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 f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20160001045 5