1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 5 July 2016 b. Date Received: 22 July 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, that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in three years and four months of service with no other adverse action. He contends his discharge was improper due to a documented recommendation. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case file, AHLTA and JLV reviewed. AHLTA notes indicate following diagnoses: Adjustment Disorder, Depression, Post Concussion Syndrome, Reaction to Chronic Stress. JLV indicates applicant has been diagnosed with PTSD, Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Chronic Adjustment Disorder. Based on the available information, the applicant has a mitigating behavioral Health disorder for the offense leading to his discharge from the Army. The applicant has been diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. As PTSD is associated with the use of illicit substances to self-medicate symptoms, there is a nexus between his PTSD and the misconduct leading to his discharge from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 October 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. incapacity to serve and post-service diagnosis of OBH and PTSD) mitigated the discrediting entry in the service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), the separation code to JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. (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: 29 December 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 5 November 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: for wrongfully using marijuana on 3 March 2015. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) / Evidence in the record shows that on 13 May 2015, it was recommended that the applicant be separated, but that his separation be suspended for a period of five months and that his characterization of service be honorable. There was also a memorandum from the Command Judge Advocate, dated 15 May 2015, reference command reasons for recommendation for suspended separation. (4) Legal Consultation Date: 16 November 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 30 November 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 August 2012 / 4 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 97 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 3 years, 4 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (29 July 2013 to 12 December 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, ACM-CS, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, MOVSM, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: There is a positive urinalysis report contained in the record coded: IR (Inspection Random), dated 11 March 2015, that shows the applicant tested positive for THC 277 on 3 March 2015. FG Article 15, dated 31 March 2015, for wrongful use of marijuana on 3 March 2015. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $500 pay per month for two months (suspended), and 15 days extra duty, and oral reprimand. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 10 April 2015, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for life circumstance problem. It was noted that the applicant completed a PTSD screening, which was positive for symptoms of PTSD. A comprehensive evaluation for PTSD was conducted which indicated that his responses on the questionnaires were referring to stress and worry related to his chapter situation and not to traumatic experiences. The applicant did not meet criteria for PTSD. In addition, the applicant completed mTBI screening which was positive for symptoms of mTBI. The applicant was evaluated by the TBI Clinic, and medical records indicated a pending neuropsychology evaluation. His provider at that time was consulted and reported that the applicant's cognitive complaints were not of a neurological etiology but rather psychological in nature (i.e., due to stress and worry), and the he considered the applicant cleared from a TBI perspective). From a behavioral health perspective, the applicant met the medical fitness standards for retention per AR 40-501, 3-31 to 3-37 as there was no indication of a board able behavioral health disorder at that time. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance counseling. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; copy of separation orders; memorandums dated 13 May 2015 and 15 May 2015; Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ; several counseling forms to include ASAP rehabilitation plan; and drug test results. 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. 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 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 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 and diminished the quality of her 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 seeks relief contending that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in three years and four months of service with no other adverse action. He contends his discharge was improper due to a documented recommendation. 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 recommendation documents the applicant make reference to dated 13 and 15 May 2015 were noted; however, as with the documents in the separation packet initiated on 5 November 2015, the applicant was made aware the separation authority was not bound by the recommendations as to characterization of service. On 5 November 2015, separation action was initiated, a recommendation for characterization of service was made, and on 30 November 2015, the separation authority after reviewing the applicant's separation packet and considering all matters, directed that the applicant's service be characterized as general (under honorable conditions). There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his discharge was improper. 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 11 October 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. incapacity to serve and post-service diagnosis of OBH and PTSD) mitigated the discrediting entry in the service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), the separation code to JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a e. Change SPD/RE Code to: Change SPD to JKN / Change to RE code to 3 f. Restore 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 AR20160013297 1