1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 July 2017 b. Date Received: 6 July 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, was discharged after completing the contractual agreement, due to an administrative error. The applicant volunteered for the assignment and could not obtain a top secret clearance. The applicant was dropped from the roster and sent back to the home unit and continued drilling. The applicant did everything in to find a unit with a 25U position available before the ETS date, but no unit was found in the Virginia area. The applicant stopped drilling in November 2011 with a unit in Virginia, because there was no position available. The applicant was receiving pay from the 319th during that time and all administrative personnel were aware that the applicant was actively seeking a unit in order to reenlist. The applicant does not know the reason for the discharge status and reduction in rank. The applicant believes there is the possibility that the volunteer mission, which would have extended the contract for an additional two years, was not handled properly resulting in an AWOL status. The applicant would like to reenlist and have the rank of E-4 reinstated, because the applicant had done nothing wrong to deserve it. The applicant fulfilled the duty and an upgrade will allow benefits as promised. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 22 February 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (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: 16 May 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: The applicant was notified via certified mail on 20 February 2012. The applicant failed to respond to the notification within 30 days of the receipt of notification. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Abuse of illegal drugs. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant failed to respond to the notification within 30 days of the receipt of notification, thereby waiving her right to legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant failed to respond to the notification within 30 days of the receipt of notification, thereby waiving her right to an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 27 April 2012 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 12 January 2005 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 19 / NIF / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 25U10, Signal Support System Specialist / 7 years, 4 months, 4 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: NIF e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, ASR, NSDL, ARCAM g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 9 November 2007, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 17 (marijuana), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 3 November 2007. i. Lost Time: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DA Form 4980; DA Form 5016; DD Form 293; Certificate of Appreciation; nine assignment Orders; discharge Orders; Employee Absence Notification Letter; and, a Memorandum. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 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. 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. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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, 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 her service. 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 she should have been retained. The applicant requests a narrative reason change. However, when service members are discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve, orders are published indicating the effective date and characterization of the discharge. Narrative reasons are not included in the order. Insomuch as the applicant's discharge order does include this element, there is no basis to change the discharge order. Further, if the applicant desires to rejoin the military, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligiblility. The applicant requests a reinstatement of her rank, because she did nothing to deserve it. However, the applicant's request does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. The applicant contends she was never informed about her imminent discharge and believes it may be an administrative error. However, the record shows the unit commander attempted to contact the applicant on several occasions and mailed the discharge packet to her last known address via certified mail. Further, Army Regulation 135-178, in pertinent part, stipulates that a Soldier is subject to discharge for unsatisfactory participation when it is determined the Soldier is unqualified for further military service because the Soldier is an unsatisfactory participant as prescribed in Chapter 4, AR 135-91 and attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in the Soldier's refusal to comply with such orders or correspondence; or a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. The applicant provided evidence demonstrating she had good service. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of her service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for her accomplishments. The applicant contends that an upgrade of her discharge would allow veterans benefits through. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits, do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 22 February 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code 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 AR20170010499 1