1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 10 July 2017 b. Date Received: 28 July 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. Request, Issues, Board Type, and Decision: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, it has been seven years since being discharged from the military and the DD Form 214 still prevents the applicant from obtaining decent jobs, so the applicant can take care of a family. The applicant has not committed any criminal acts or gotten into any trouble since the incident in the military. The discharge was inequitable because it was based on an incident that happened in January 2009, which the applicant tested positive for marijuana. The applicant was AWOL for less than 30 days and should have received a CG Article 15, but received a FG Article 15 and a Chapter 14. 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 Partner Relational Problem. The applicant has a 50% service-connected rating from the VA for PTSD. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is partially mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 March 2019, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post- service diagnosis of PTSD), and a prior period of honorable service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. 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: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) / AR 635- 200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 May 2010 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 February 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he tested positive for marijuana (5 January 2009); and he was AWOL from (21 December 2009 to 28 December 2009). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 23 February 2010 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 April 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 August 2007 / 4 years / extension of service was at the request and for the convenience of the Government. Retained in service 395 days for the convenience of the Government per AR 635-200. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / GED Certificate / 91 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25U10, Signal Support Systems Specialist / 5 years, 23 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 14 April 2005 to 14 August 2007 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / SWA / Kuwait / Iraq, 15 May 2009 to 25 March 2010 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, NOPDR, ASR, OSR-2 g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant submitted a positive urinalysis test coded IR (Inspection Random), dated 5 January 2009, for THC. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 January 2010, relates the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in any administrative proceedings. He had no history or symptoms which would indicate a diagnosis of PTSD or TBI. He was cleared from a behavioral health perspective for administrative actions deemed appropriate by command. FG Article 15, dated 1 February 2010, for without authority, absented himself from his unit which he was required to be (21 December 2009 until 28 December 2009); and wrongful use of marijuana between (6 December 2008 and 5 January 2009); reduction to PV2 / E-2, forfeiture of $784 pay for two months (suspended) and extra duty for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 7 days, 21 December 2009 until 27 December 2009; mode of return unknown. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 214; FG Article 15, unexecuted (two pages); two DA Forms 4856 (counseling statements, four pages); DA Form 31, (Request for Leave); two DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action); positive urinalysis test (three pages); FLAG (Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions); Enlisted Record Brief; Request for legal action memorandum; and a Joint Services Transcript (four pages). 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. 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 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 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) 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. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, 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 his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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, it has been seven years since he was discharged from the military and his DD Form 214 still prevents from obtaining decent jobs, so he can take care of his family. The US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to upgrade a discharge based on time elapsed since the discharge. Each case is decided on its own merits based on all factors contained in the official record or as submitted by the applicant. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The applicant further contends, he has not committed any criminal acts or gotten into any trouble since his incident in the military. The applicant is to be commended for his effort. However, this contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. The applicant also contends, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an incident that happened in January 2009, which he tested positive for marijuana. The service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant additionally contends, he was AWOL for less than 30 days, he should have received a CG Article 15 but received a FG Article 15 and a Chapter 14. 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 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 8 March 2019, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and a prior period of honorable service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. 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: Honorable 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 AR20170016447 1