1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 January 2017 b. Date Received: 30 January 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, believes the discharge to be in error or unjust, because it was based on a single, onetime, non- reoccurring offense. At the time of the offense, the applicant was one day away from being promoted to Specialist, which the applicant had fought hard to earn. During service, the applicant earned several awards and all that the applicant did was to push and better oneself. The applicant took pride in the service and in uniform. The applicant made mistakes, but learned from those mistakes and became better. The applicant had plans of continuing a military career, by going to multiple schools to prepare for Special Forces Selection. The applicant would have never do something to jeopardize the selection process. The applicant was a Soldier above all else, who hardly ever took leave because the job came first. During that time period, which the offense was said to have taken place, the applicant was on mandatory post-deployment block leave. At the time, the applicant had a back injury and was taking regular Tylenol. The applicant has never used drugs as pride would never allow the applicant to put the platoon or oneself in danger. Every drug test the applicant ever took before or after that single offense was clean. When the positive test result came back, the applicant was devastated and cried in disbelief and confusion. The test reflected a positive result of nearly 4,500 Nano grams of codeine and morphine. The applicant asked a medic, who was a Staff Sergeant, about the amount, who said the applicant was lucky to be alive and breathing. If the applicant states had been doing drugs, it would have shown up in PT test results. The applicant would never knowingly do drugs as the applicant came from a military family and did everything to honor them. At the time, an ex-girlfriend was trying to do anything she could to get the applicant to end military service when the contract ended. When the applicant told her about the plan to reenlist, she became mad and said, "not if I can help it." The applicant told the chain of command about being innocent, but they refused to listen. The applicant believes they were either convinced that the applicant was guilty or they just wanted to meet their quota of the downsizing the military, which was going on at the time. The applicant states that when the Field Grade Article 15 was read, the applicant had given up on trying to convince them about being innocent. The applicant received punishment of 45 days extra duty, 45 days half pay, and was restricted to base. The applicant was also stripped of rank in the most disrespectful way possible and the chapter paperwork was initiated. During the entire out processing, the applicant was rushed through without anything being explained. At the time of discharge, the applicant was not aware of the impact the discharge would have on life and in trying to find a decent job. After discharge, the applicant had a job that lasted only a week. If the applicant had known, the applicant would have never signed and was disrespected and stripped of pride. When the applicant returned home on the last day of service, all military uniforms, paperwork, and dog tags were missing. The ex-girlfriend had thrown them away and burned them. The only thing the applicant managed to save was the Blue Infantry Cord, and still has today. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of ADHD, Adjustment Disorder, mTBI, and Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). The applicant is 70% service- connected for PTSD. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 April 2019, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e.in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI). Therefore, 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, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (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-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 17 May 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 5 April 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 10 January 2012, he tested positive for codeine and morphine (Misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 April 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: undated / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 July 2009 / 4 years, 17 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 10 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (12 November 2010 - 5 November 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 25 January 2012, reflects the applicant tested positive for COD > LoL (codeine) and MOR 4497 (morphine) during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 10 January 2012. FG Article 15, dated 21 February 2012, for wrongfully using codeine and morphine (between 8 and 10 January 2012). The record did not reflect any imposed punishment. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 and a self-authored statement. 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 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 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 have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends the event that caused his discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. 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. The applicant contends that he had good service. 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 applicant contends he never used drugs and was rushed through the separation proceedings without any explanation of the details. However, 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 an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 24 April 2019, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e.in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI). Therefore, 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, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 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, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20170006141 1