1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 January 2018 b. Date Received: 1 March 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that when the applicant injured the right knee during AIT at Fort Jackson, SC, the applicant was never given the option for a disability discharge. The applicant contends that as of today, the applicant is upward bound with the University of Kansas at the VA Medical Center in Leavenworth, KS domiciliary. 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 no BH diagnoses while on active duty. The applicant does not currently have a service-connected rating from the VA. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with Bipolar Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Polysubstance Abuse, Cannabis Use, and Ecstasy Use Disorder. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 April 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of OBHI), homelessness, and post- service accomplishments. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to General (under honorable conditions). Additionally, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, 27, and 28, contain erroneous entries. The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, c. block 27, reentry code changed to 3, d. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). (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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 26 June 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 June 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: for testing positive for the use of marijuana 9 January 2005. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board as agreed on in his Offer to Plead Guilty, 3 May 2005. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 June 2005 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 April 2004 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / HS Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 63B10, Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic / 1 year, 2 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 10 February 2005, for the wrongful use of marijuana on 9 January 2005. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $667.00 per month for two months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. It should be noted; the applicant's separation file contains two separation packets; the first packet was initiated on or about 7 March 2005 as a result of the applicant testing positive for the use of marijuana on 9 January 2005. The unit commander recommended that the applicant received a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). On or about 31 March 2005, the separation authority approved the separation and directed that the applicant be separated from the service and that a General Discharge Certificate, with a Corresponding Characterization of service be issued. On 2 June 2005, a second separation packet was initiated by the same unit commander, for the same reason; however, the recommendation was for the applicant to receive an Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. Offer to Plead Guilty, dated 3 May 2005, whereas he agree to plead guilty to the charge and its specification and to waive his right to an administrative separation board proceeding in the event his chain of command initiated separation against him IAW AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12 and recommends an other than honorable discharge. Summary Court-Martial, dated 11 May 2005, for the wrongful use of cocaine on15 March 2005. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $824.00 pay per month for one month and 29 days confinement. Memorandum, dated 10 February 2005, reference referral to the Department of Behavioral Health for a Command Directed Mental Status Examination, pursuant to Chapter proceedings under section 14-12c. The applicant was evaluated for substance abuse. Negative counseling statement reference acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The Progress Notes submitted by the applicant indicate he was admitted to the Dwight D. Eisenhower VA Medical Center on 11 January 2018. The center is a mental health and substance use residential treatment program. The letter submitted by the applicant from Dr. A.L. Dutch Doerman, Clinical Psychologist, indicates the applicant was being treated by him for substance use disorder (alcohol and marijuana) and major depression. The applicant had started in there Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) on 27 November 2017 which followed a 24 day stay on their inpatient psychiatric ward. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Progress Notes from the Dwight D. Eisenhower VA Medical Center, dated 18 January 2018; a letter from a Clinical Psychologist; a certificate for completion of the Veterans Affairs Substance Treatment and Recovery Clinic, dated 5 January 2018; and a DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant provided a certificate for completion of the Veterans Affairs Substance Treatment and Recovery Clinic, dated 5 January 2018. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). 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. Furthermore, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, the applicant 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 a honorable discharge. 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 that when he injured his right knee during AIT at Fort Jackson, SC, he was never given the option for a disability discharge. The applicant contends that as of today he is upward bound with the University of Kansas at the VA Medical Center in Leavenworth, KS domiciliary. The applicant's contentions were noted; 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 at the time of discharge. 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 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 April 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of OBHI), homelessness, and post-service accomplishments. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to General (under honorable conditions). Additionally, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, 27, and 28, contain erroneous entries. The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, c. block 27, reentry code changed to 3, d. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Serious Offense) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKQ / 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 AR20180004304 1