1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 April 2016 b. Date Received: 18 April 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he believes his discharge is inequitable because it was based on only one incident during his 13 months of service. The applicant states he was young and made a dumb mistake, but the punishment was too severe for a first time offense. He believes he was a great Soldier that knew his job very well. He plans to try and reenlist again in the future, because the Army is the only thing that he wanted to do with his life. He desires to serve his country and finish the right way. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 June 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27 contains the erroneous reentry code of 3. In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27 to read RE-4, as required by Army Regulations. (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-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 23 March 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 14 March 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He failed to adhere to the Army's substance abuse policy by wrongfully using two schedule V controlled substances, Oxazepam and Temazepam, between on or about 1 November 2015 and on or about 1 December 2015. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 15 March 2016, the applicant waived his rights to consult with A JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 March 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 February 2015 / 3 years, 18 months b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 1 year, 1 month, 1 day d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 1 December 2015, reflects the applicant tested positive for OXAZ 364 (Oxazepam) and TEMA 5633>LOL (Temazepam), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 9 December 2015. FG Article 15, dated 19 January 2016, for wrongfully using Oxazepam and Temazepam, controlled schedule V substances (between 1 November and 1 December 2016). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $778 pay per month for two months (one month suspended); extra duty and restriction for 30 days; and, an oral reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 25 January 2016, reflects the applicant was cleared for any 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: Sedative Misuse (AXIS I). 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. 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. 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 be retained on active duty. The applicant contends the event that caused his discharge from the Army was an isolated incident and that the punishment was too severe. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. Further, 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 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 good service and was very knowledgeable in his job. 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 service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code as 3. The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of misconduct (drug abuse). Soldiers processed for misconduct (drug abuse) will be assigned an SPD Code of JKK and an RE Code of 4. 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 should have been assigned an RE code of 4. An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. Notwithstanding the administrative error, 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 June 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27 contains the erroneous reentry code of 3. In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27 to read RE-4, as required by Army Regulations. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a new DD-214/: Yes 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 to SPD / Change RE code to 4 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 AR20160008416 4