1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 July 2017 b. Date Received: 24 July 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, provides a statement from the wife, wherein she confessed that the marijuana cigarette and Taser belonged to her. The wife also states that the applicant was not aware of any of the items that were in the vehicle. The Taser that was found, was for her safety when she travels alone and admitted that the marijuana cigarette was from earlier in the day. She also stated, she had awakened the applicant to go outside to smoke a cigarette. The applicant states, while in the car, the applicant had begun to fall asleep again, and the wife proceeded to call her sister and smoke a cigarette. The applicant states, the canvass report, reflects the investigator conducted interviews throughout barracks, questioning different Soldiers about any drug related activities involving the applicant. The subsequent room search and investigation came back negative. The agent report reflects, the applicant and wife were interviewed and most of the information was falsified. It reflected the wife and the applicant confessed to using marijuana in the parking lot adjacent to the building 6752; and that the applicant was aware of the marijuana cigarette in the vehicle, but did not participate in the activity. The applicant states, the wife did confess that earlier that day she borrowed the applicant's vehicle to run errands and visit family and friends. While out, she did partake in smoking a marijuana cigarette, but never once confessed to using marijuana on post. The wife explained she was not aware of the marijuana cigarette in her cigarette box. The applicant confessed to knowing the wife smoked from time to time, when she is out with family and friends, but never to knowing she smoked on post. The applicant states, the wife did have the vehicle, but the applicant was not aware of the marijuana cigarette nor the Taser. The applicant was tired and fell asleep in the vehicle while the wife smoked a cigarette. The applicant believes that there was already a negative impression stemming from a sexual assault case. The applicant had asked the first sergeant countless times for a change of unit, so that the applicant could have a better opportunity and a fresh start. The requests were denied, even though the applicant believed one's reputation was highly impacted and affected by trials and investigation of the first incident. Throughout the applicant's Army career, the applicant never failed a drug test, never was involved in drug activities; and, had not been counseled or required to attend drug classes for drugs. The applicant's hope is the evidence will provide the Board insight that the applicant is an innocent man who being punished for the wife's honest mistake. 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 Generalized Anxiety Disorder. The applicant is 20% service-connected for non-BH diagnoses from the VA. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnosis is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 January 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (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: 30 June 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 May 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 2 February 2014, he wrongfully possessed marijuana. On or about 2 February 2014, he failed to obey a lawful general regulation by possessing a Taser. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 29 May 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: None (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 June 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 June 2012 / 3 years, 24 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 91D10, Power-Generation Equipment Repairer / 2 years, 19 days 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: CID Report of Investigation - Initial Final, dated 20 May 2013, reflects an investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of Aggravated Sexual Contact, when he grabbed PV2 [redacted] on her breasts and buttocks. CG Article 15, dated 6 January 2014, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (7 and 12 November 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $396 pay (suspended); and, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Military Police Report, dated 21 February 2014, reflects the applicant had committed the offense of: Failure to Obey General Order (Possession of a Taser). The report reflects the previous offenses of: Aggravated Sexual Contact (Adult) (18 December 2012); Aggravated Sexual Contact (Adult) (10 January 2013); and, Aggravated Sexual Contact (21 May 2013). CID Report of Investigation - Initial Final, dated 26 February 2014, reflects an investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of Wrongful Possession marijuana when a subsequent search of his vehicle he was in possession of approximately 0.255 grams of marijuana. FG Article 15, dated 14 April 2014, for wrongfully possessing a Taser (2 February 2014); and, wrongfully possessing marijuana (2 February 2014). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; and, extra duty for 30 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 29 April 2014, 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: Anxiety NOS. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; Agent's Investigation Report; Canvass Interview Worksheet; and, self-authored statement; spouse's 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. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKK" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (drug abuse). 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 his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. 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 narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635- 200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)," and the separation code is "JKK." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends he did not use marijuana and that his wife confessed to using the drug. Further, his command had a bad impression of him based on his prior incidents and ignored his requests to be transferred to another unit. 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 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 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 29 January 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20170011095 1