1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 29 March 2016 b. Date Received: 14 April 2016 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he believes his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 31 months, with no other adverse actions. The incident that resulted in his discharge was directly related to post deployment stress, which resulted in him making a serious error in judgement (smoking pot). He was having troubles sleeping at nights and dealing with the memories of the resent deployment and the rumors of a second deployment in the near future. He accepts responsibility for his decision and understands it was a bad choice. His decision was affected, in part, by the climate within his unit. The environment was and he believes the command was aware of how toxic the climate was. The unit did not encourage Soldiers to come forth with issues or troubles they were suffering from upon their return from a very stressful deployment. They monitored how Soldiers were filling out the post deployment health assessments, and made him feel uncomfortable while trying to accurately complete the assessment. His was told they would deploy again within one year and that no one would be allowed to leave the unit. After a series of events, approximately 12 Soldiers tested positive in his battalion and were punished. He believes all were sent for treatment, but the treatment was to be done during the punishment phase. The treatment was appreciated, but during a period where one was performing extra duty and was another way of showing the treatment was not expected to be successful or was a low priority. He understands that treatment and punishment are intended to rehabilitate a Soldier for further service. He believes he was worthy of a second chance, but none of them were given that chance. He was not a marginal performer and was assigned responsibilities well beyond his rank. As a result of his honorable service, he received several awards and recognitions. Initially, he was glad knowing he would not have to deploy again; however shortly after returning home, he started to understand the impact of his decision. He desires to rejoin the military and understands he would have to show greater maturity than when he used marijuana. He has matured since that time and as time goes on he will continue to mature. His family has a history of long and honorable service in the military he would like the opportunity to continue with that family tradition. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant (GT = 123) had a diagnosis of Cannabis Abuse in AHLTA and no behavioral health diagnoses of service-connected percentages in the JLV as of 05 June 2017. His pre-discharge medical exam showed he had an S1 profile on 06 February 2012. He had a pre-discharge Mental Status Exam (MSE) on 15 February 2012. The MSE examiner concluded he met medical retention standards, could understand and participate in administrative proceedings, and knew right from wrong. He also had negative screens for PTSD and mild TBI. The applicant was cleared for administrative discharge. The applicant was an infantryman had served a deployment form October 2010 to October 2011. He was with the 10th Mountain at the time he tested positive, after his deployment, for THC. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 June 2017, and by a 3 - 2 vote, after carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of his service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge; and, as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. 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: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) / AR 635- 200 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 19 March 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 January 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: he smoked marijuana. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 February 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 13 March 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 June 2009 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / 1 year college / 123 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 8 months, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (23 October 2010 - 10 October 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL / The applicant provided permanent orders which shows he was awarded the CIB; however, the award is not reflected on his DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 13 December 201, shows the applicant tested positive for THC 37 (marijuana), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 1 December 2011. FG Article 15, dated 12 January 2012, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 1 November and 1 December 2011). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $689 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Developmental Counseling Form, for: Failure to obey an order or regulation; and, wrongful use of a controlled substance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 15 February 2012, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with: Cannabis Abuse (based on his unit urinalysis). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted 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, 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. 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." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. 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 marred the quality of his service. The record confirms that 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 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 contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635- 200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)," and the separation code is "JKK." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 4. An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. The applicant, in effect, contends that he was suffering from PTSD, which affected his behavior. However, the service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The applicant contends that he had toxic leadership and was not able to truly seek help; however, 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. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. Accordingly, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. 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 is to be commended for his accomplishments. 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 7 June 2017, and by a 3 - 2 vote, after carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of his service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge; and, as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. 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: Honorable 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 AR20160008303 1