1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 23 November 2016 b. Date Received: 27 December 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to his narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to reenlist. The applicant contends that while stationed in Asadabad Afghanistan he had brought his steroid use to his platoon sergeant (PSG) SFC C. P. He was told to keep things to himself while he got things in order to help with the addiction. A week later his PSG and platoon leader (PL) escorted him to a quiet place on the compound and when he started talking about the steroid use he was told to be quiet, then the PL started reading him his rights. He was flown back to Bagram and placed under administrative watch, a few days later with a urinalysis performed and a prior request for treatment was then finally granted on the 18th of May 2003. Nothing could be done after his appointment to resolve the situation to continue his service. He contends there had been multiple interviews with the onsite CID agents and each time they came back to talk with him, his previous statements he had given them were changed. His own words were being rewritten. He had brought this up to his chain of command but had no effect. His going to SFC P was to avoid this outcome. He was sent home and discharged before any treatment could be started following his diagnosis from CPT X. and he has not been able to receive any conformation of the urinalysis whether positive or negative. He is now married to a wonderful woman who has 21 years of service with the NC National Guard. She is currently an E- 8. He is now asking with great sincerity, humility and respect that his case be reviewed and his reason for separation be changed so he can reenter his beloved Army and continue to serve our great nation and its people. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, there is insufficient evidence to render a decision regarding mitigation. SM had no electronic military medical records in AHLTA and his VA records included no behavioral health diagnoses. He has been seen intermittently at the VA and has denied any behavioral health concerns. A Medical note dated 28 May 2003 indicated SM was seen in the Combat Stress Clinic on 18 May requesting treatment and evaluation for anabolic steroid abuse. It was confirmed that he was addicted to anabolic steroids and had a potential diagnosis of Body Dysmorphic Disorder. In a sworn statement, also on 18 May, SM indicated he participated in weight lifting and purchased several vials of steroids. He noted feeling himself lose control, was irritable and not thinking straight. During a health and welfare check on 17 May he disclosed to SFC that he was using steroids with the reason being for a personal goal to be better. In summary, there is not enough information to determine if SM had a diagnosis of Body Dysmorphic Disorder at the time of his steroid use. The psychiatrist indicated a possible diagnosis and there is no further supportive medical documentation. Furthermore, the condition would not be mitigating for his intent on distributing steroids which is indicated in several sworn statements from other service members. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 March 2018, 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 7 August 2003 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 30 June 2003 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: wrongful possession and use of steroids (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 30 June 2003 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 22 July 2003 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 July 2002 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS Graduate / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 4 years, 5 months, 19 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 19 February 1999 to 7 July 2002 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (18 January 2003 to 10 June 2003; based on memorandum in record) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: November 2001 to October 2002, Fully Capable November 2002 to June 2003, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG, Article 15, dated 7 June 2003, for wrongfully possessing a certain amount of steroids (Deca Durabolin) a schedule III controlled substance, with the intent to distribute the said controlled substance while receiving special pay under 37 USC 310, which was in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ and wrongfully using steroids (Deca Durabolin) a schedule III controlled substance, with the intent to distribute the said controlled substance while receiving special pay under 37 USC 310, which was in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ between 1 March 2003 and 17 May 2003. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $874 pay per month for two months. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 16 June 2003, shows the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I for substance abuse, other (steroids). It was noted that the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity. There was no evidence of an emotional or mental disorder of psychiatric significance to warrant disposition through medical channels. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action and or training deemed appropriate by his command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; documents from separation file to include memorandum of record reference "request for treatment and evaluation for anabolic steroid abuse;" and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted by the applicant. 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (serious offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service 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 a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment 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 characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors 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. Caution shall be exercised 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 general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to his narrative reason for discharge. 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. Furthermore, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, the applicant compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier. The applicant, as a noncommissioned officer, 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. 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 was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635- 200. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ." 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 seeks relief contending that while stationed in Asadabad Afghanistan he had brought his steroid use to his platoon sergeant (PSG) SFC C. P. He was told to keep things to himself while he got things in order to help with the addiction. A week later his PSG and platoon leader (PL) escorted him to a quiet place on the compound and when he started talking about the steroid use he was told to be quiet, then the PL started reading me his rights. The applicant contention were noted; however, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contentions of having notified his chain of command of his steroid use. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant contends he is now married to a wonderful woman who has 21 years of service with the NC National Guard. She is currently an E-8. He is now asking with great sincerity, humility and respect that his case be reviewed and his reason for separation be changed so he can reenter his beloved Army and continue to serve our great nation and its people. The applicant's post-service accomplishment were noted and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishments. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to reenlist. 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 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 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 16 March 2018, 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 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 Code to: No Change f. Change 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 AR20160019648 4