1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 November 2017 b. Date Received: 9 November 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he is and was a leader who prides himself and helped others. He firmly believes that he served with honor and distinction. His whole life he wanted to serve his country and when 9/11 happened, he was 900 feet from the Pentagon. After that, he began to make preparations to join the Army. He joined in July and reported in August 2003. His proudest moment was graduating Basic training a new man who was full of accomplishments. In his Advanced Individual Training (AIT), he was the top of his class with a perfect score. Two of his buddies were failing, so he would stay late with them and study the material and help break it down in a way that would be able to learn, which resulted in both passing the class. He reported to Fort Bliss, where he wholeheartedly continued in his studies and in his physical training. He loved running and scored a 300 on his Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) and eventually became the best runner on the base, earning a trophy for his unit. He states, he helped other Soldiers who were struggling to pass the APFT requirements, by teaching them how to improve their run. He believed in the warrior ethos "I will never leave a fallen comrade." He states over the a period of eight months he developed severe shin splints and bone fractures that were to the point of disability. His injuries prevented him from walking without severe pain and prevented him from running. His drill sergeants began to harass him and label him a faker and malinger. As a result, the applicant began to self-medicate by drinking. He states, he was devastated when he was told that the Army was processing him for a medical discharge. He states, he has a past of family abandonment and he struggled to have people stand by his side through difficult times. A Soldier told him once as whole they were a family and a brotherhood. He believed this way and was most likely the reason why, he gave whole heartedly a 100 percent. The lack of support for him began to drain him a little at a time and he began to get into trouble, which resulted in him being punished. He lost his rank, depleted his pay and his family ended up losing their apartment, but since he was not married, the Army would not help. He began to feel more abandoned and unsupported. He tried to commit suicide and was in hospital with no help. He does not understand why he was left behind, when the Army drills this into every Soldier. He states, he still has not recovered and is still fighting a major addiction, which began in the Army. His trust issues were made worse and he has anger for those who said they would stand by him if he gave it his all. In many ways, he never has left the Army and is still a Soldier who is try to survive on his own. He has mounting medical problems that stem from his service, which need to be addressed. He requests that the Board recognize his honorable service ant that he is still an American Solider, who is still in the fight and still living the sworn duty to defend the Nation, which he loves. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was not diagnosed with any behavioral health condition. As such, there are no mitigating BH conditions. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 October 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on compassionate considerations. 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. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27 contains the erroneous reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27 to read RE-3, as required by Army Regulations. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 30 June 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 June 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He tested positive for cocaine on 19 May 2004. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 22 June 2004, the applicant waived his rights to consult with a JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 June 2004 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 28 August 2003 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / None / 10 months, 3 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: None g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 26 May 2004, reflects the applicant tested positive for BZE 25812 (cocaine), during a Command Directed (CO) urinalysis testing, conducted on 19 May 2004. Developmental Counseling Form, dated 4 June 2004, reflects the applicant was counseled by his drill sergeant, informing the applicant of the intent to punish him under the UCMJ for the use of an illegal substance. He was found to have used cocaine during a command directed urinalysis given on 19 May 2004. FG Article 15, dated 16 June 2004, for wrongfully using cocaine (between 12 and 19 May 2004). The punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $596 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 June 2004, reflects the applicant was cleared for 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: Occupational Problems; Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood; and, Substance- related Disorder NOS. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 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. 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. 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 that medical issues contributed to his discharge from the Army. However, the service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Occupational Problems; Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood; and, Substance-related Disorder NOS. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 8 June 2004, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation, which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears, the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. The applicant contends that he was harrased and discriminated by members of his chain of command; however, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. Accordingly, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 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 24 October 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on compassionate considerations. 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. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27 contains the erroneous reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27 to read RE-3, as required by Army Regulations. 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 / RE-3 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 AR20180000291 1