1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 June 2017 b. Date Received: 17 July 2017 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 previous to the one and only incident he was an exemplary Soldier who served the United States Army and his country with honor and valor and does not feel his discharge properly portray that. He contends he has been diagnosed with sever PTSD since his discharge and has been rated at 100% for it through the Department of Veterans' Affairs. In speaking to medical personnel during his treatment, they feel as if his undiagnosed PTSD played a role in the actions that lead to his less than favorable discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, there is no psychiatric mitigation for his misconduct. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 17 January 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 (Drug Abuse) / AR 635- 200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 12 July 2010 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 January 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: use of Cocaine, a controlled substance (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 13 January 2010, the applicant elected to have his case heard before an administrative separation board (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 4 May 2010, determined that the applicant did commit a serious offense as defined in AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12. Based on the findings, the board recommended that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). On page 10 of the applicant's administrative separation board procedures he makes reference to having self-referred himself to ASAP because of an incident with his wife prior the positive drug test; however, this information was not found in the available record. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 June 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 28 February 2008 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / 1 Year College / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 18B2P, Special Forces Weapons Sergeant, 19D2P, Cavalry Scout / 11 years, 10 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 21 August 1998 to 20 July 1999 / NA ADT, 21 July 1999 to 28 April 2000 / HD ARNG, 29 April 2000 to 27 August 2002 / HD RA, 28 August 2002 to 1 May 2005 / HD RA, 2 May 2005 to 27 February 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (26 January 2003 to 1 August 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NOPDR-2, ASR, Special Forces Tab g. Performance Ratings: 29 January 2007 to 31 December 2008, Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Toxicological Examination shows that the applicant's blood contained 44 mg/dL of ethanol. Ethanol was identified and quantitated by headspace gas chromatography at a limit of quantitation of 20 mg/dL. The blood was screened for amphetamine, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, cannabinoids, cocaine, opiates and phencyclidine by immunoassay or chromatography. The following drugs were detected: Positive Cocaine metabolite: b enzoylecgonine was detected in the blood by immunoassay and confirmed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. The blood contained 0.14 mg/L of benzoylecgonine as quantitated by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, date 1 October 2009, for being involved in a motor vehicle incident with the Comayagua, Honduran Police which led to him being arrested and being unaccounted for until the following day. Due to the political situation in Honduras, the Soto Cano Airbase, Honduras, where his unit was assigned, had been under curfew, as such, he also was in violation of SOCSOUTH, AOB and JTF-B curfews. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 10 December 2009, show the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I for occupational problem and Axis II diagnosis deferred on Axis II. It was noted 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 possess sufficient mental capacity to understand and participated intelligently as a respondent in any administrative proceedings. The applicant was psychologically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by this command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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. 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. Also, the appropriate SPD code and narrative reason to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged for drug offenses is "JKK" and the RE code is 4. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. The applicant seeks relief contending he has been diagnosed with sever PTSD since his discharge and has been rated at 100% for it through the Department of Veterans' Affairs. In speaking to medical personnel during his treatment, they feel as if his undiagnosed PTSD played a role in the actions that lead to his less than favorable discharge. Although the applicant did not submit these documents with his application, it should be noted; the fact that the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions that he suffered with while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. The applicant also contends that prior to the one and only incident he was an exemplary Soldier who served the United States Army and his country with honor and valor and does not feel his discharge properly portray that. 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. 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. 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 on his accomplishments. It should be noted by regulation, an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct (drug abuse). It appears the applicant's generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. 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 17 January 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 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. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20170010977 5