1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 January 2017 b. Date Received: 10 February 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, when the applicant first heard that the applicant would have to sit in front of a board and describe offense, gladly accepted and was well prepared. Before going to the review board, unit advisor blatantly told the applicant that "it would be a waste of time to hire a lawyer because it's a [zero-] tolerance policy and your fate is pretty much already decided." The unit advisor also added that it was very costly, and for an unemployed college student, the applicant could not afford to spend any money outside of food and books. The applicant became immediately discouraged by this news did as he said and did not get legal counsel. The applicant trusted the unit advisor and honestly believed he had the applicant's best interest at heart. Upon arriving to the hearing, the board immediately asked the applicant why the applicant was not represented by counsel. The applicant explained what the unit advisor had said, and to say the least they were upset. The applicant continued with explanation of why the applicant did what the applicant did. At the time, the applicant was young and going through many things with family and was on the brink of suicide, which was why the applicant began smoking. The applicant tried to consume so much to never wake up again. The applicant states, if it were not for two best friends, who were also in the unit, the applicant would not be here to tell the story. The applicant states, no one in the unit seemed to care about anything going on outside of drill, which hurt more than anything. The applicant failed a urinalysis for smoking marijuana for the first and last time in the applicant's life. The applicant had requested to be sent to rehabilitation, but without legal representation, was unaware of what was being said because of the amount of jargon during the hearing. The applicant understood being placed on "probation" until the applicant slipped up. From that point on, the applicant was on a straight and narrow and passed all PT tests, rifle qualifications, and even requested to be placed on extra duty, just to show that the applicant was very apologetic for what the applicant had done and was willing to do anything to fix it. The applicant continued drilling for six months, until randomly receiving a call from the platoon sergeant, who said discharge orders were available. The applicant was stunned because ten minutes before he had called the applicant, the applicant was at the unit cleaning weapons between classes. Had the applicant known they would be discharged this way, would have obtained legal representation to improve chances. Since discharge, the applicant has graduated from undergraduate college with a Bachelor's Degree in Criminal Justice and is planning on pursuing a Master's Degree in Forensic Psychology. The applicant understands they made a mistake, but does not believe, should have to pay for it for the rest of their life. The applicant has changed since then, and is more than willing to do what it takes to prove it even if it means serving the remainder of her contract and even re-enlisting. The applicant states, if an honorable discharge is not an option, requests an upgrade to a general discharge, so that the applicant does not have to pay for the past for the rest of the applicant's life. The applicant loves law enforcement and before depression, loved the military and would love to jump start career, while still young so that the applicant is not working in late sixties. The applicant apologizes for wrong doings, but no one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes and requests the Board be understanding to circumstances. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 August 2020, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, matters surrounding the discharge, and prior period of honorable service. 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 135-178, Paragraph 11-1a. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Use of Illegal Drugs / AR 135-178 / Chapter 12-1(d) / NIF / NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 24 January 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 22 May 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Abuse of illegal drugs. (3) Recommended Characterization: The applicant's commander recommended a characterization of service as determined by an Administrative Separation Board. / General (Under Honorable Conditions) The intermediate commander's recommended a characterization of service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 27 June 2013, the applicant was notified via certified mail, to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of her rights. On 18 August 2013, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared without counsel. The board recommended the applicant's discharge with characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) and that the separation be suspended and automatically remitted if not vacated for a period of 12 months. On 8 January 2014, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations with the exception of no suspension. (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 8 January 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 2 October 2009 / 8 years (USAR) b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist / 4 years, 3 months, 21 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: IADT, 30 December 2009 - 19 May 2010 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 18 January 2013, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 73 (marijuana), during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 6 January 2013. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; self-authored statement; third-party letter. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, she has earned her Bachelor's Degree and is pursuing a Master's Degree. The states, she has no criminal history and has been working as a federal employee. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. Chapter 12 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, and convictions by civil authorities. 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 3-18f (1), stipulates, if the separation authority approves the recommendations of the board on the issue of separation or characterization (or both) this constitutes approval of the board's findings and recommendations under paragraph 3-17h, unless the separation authority expressly modifies such findings or recommendations. However, the Separation Authority cannot authorize a characterization of service less favorable than that recommended by the board. 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 her under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) and a narrative reason change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. Based on the service record, it appears that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's discharge order, Type of Discharge as "Under Other Than Honorable Conditions". The service record confirms the separation authority approved the administrative separation board findings and recommendations, wherein the Board recommended the applicant be separated with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). The governing regulation stipulates the separation authority may not direct a characterization less favorable than recommended by the administrative separation Board. The records show the proper discharge and separation procedures were not followed in this case. Based on this, the characterization of service is improper. The discharge was not consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was not within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was not provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 August 2020, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, matters surrounding the discharge, and prior period of honorable service. 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 135-178, Paragraph 11-1a. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Authority to: AR 135-178, Paragraph 11-1a 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 AR20170001977 3