1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 May 2018 b. Date Received: 28 June 2018 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, would like an upgrade of discharge for the purpose of being able to rejoin the military and to receive full benefits. The applicant is an OEF/OIF combat veteran. The applicant served in the Army as a 19D10 D3 Cavalry Scout. The applicant was MRAP certified and designed long range marksman who served in the desert for one year. The applicant was diagnosed with anxiety while overseas and suffers from ADHD and PTSD. The applicant thought the training was very real and intense and they were targeted one night on patrol. The applicant joined the military at 17 and was 18 when this incident took place. The applicant should have received treatment, not a discharge. The applicant's only passion is to return to the frontlines as a 19D again. If this is impossible, the applicant asks that it be taken into consideration that the applicant was prescribed XANAX before going to Iraq, and that night this incident took place, the applicant cannot remember or took too many XANAX. 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 Anxiety Disorder NOS, Dysthymic Disorder, and Unspecified Psychoactive Substance Abuse. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with Brief Psychotic Disorder, Alcohol Abuse, Cannabis Abuse and Other Stimulant Use. The applicant does not currently have a diagnosis of PTSD. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 June 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, 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 / Chapter 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 18 June 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 21 March 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for wrongfully stealing a watch of a value of less than $500.00 15 December 2008; Wrongfully possessing Monjoect size 27 short sterile needles drug paraphernalia 16 December 2008; Wrongfully possessed Vasopressin, Haldol, Giyopyrrolate, Polo Caine, Epinephrine, Meclizine, and Xylocaine, all that were not prescribed to him on 16 December 2008; and Willfully failing to perform his duties while on kitchen patrol duty on 25 December 2008. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 21 March 2009, the applicant voluntarily waive his right to speak with a TDS attorney and understood that his pending separation action would be submitted to the separation authority for final action. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 13 March 2009, the applicant voluntarily and unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 22 April 2009 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 August 2007 / 3 years, 18 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 19D10, Cavalry Scout / 1 year, 8 months, 23 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (10 June 2008 to 13 May 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 27 August 2008, which shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for shoplifting and making false official statement. Military Police Report, dated 15 December 2008, which shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for larceny of private property from troop billets. Military Police Report, dated 17 December 2008, which shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for larceny of government property, wrongful use of a controlled substance. The unit commander's recommendation memorandum makes reference to the applicant having received a Summary Court-Martial on 21 March 2009 (reason unknown). He was found guilty and sentenced to forfeiture of $863 pay per month for one month and confinement for 30 days FG Article 15, dated 23 September 2009 for stealing a bottle of Tight Supplements of a value of about $37.00, the property of AAFES on 27 August 2008. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $673 pay per month for two months, and extra duty for 45 days. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Military confinement 30 days (27 March 2008 to 25 April 2008) / the applicant was placed in confinement following his Court-Martial at COB Adder in Tallil, Iraq 27 March 2008 and was later relocated to Kuwait to finish his confinement. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; certificates of training, completion, deployment, and achievement; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. 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 an 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 he is an OEF/OIF combat veteran. He served in the Army as a 19D10 D3 Cavalry Scout. He was MRAP certified and designed long range marksman who served in the desert for one year. He was diagnosed with anxiety while overseas and he suffers from ADHD and PTSD. He saw his training was very real and intense, they were targeted one night on patrol. He contends he joined the military at 17 and was 18 when this incident took place. He believes he should have received treatment not a discharge. His only passion is to return to the frontlines as a 19D again. If this is impossible he ask that it be taken into consideration he was prescribed Xanax before he ever went to Iraq, that night this incident took place, he cannot remember / he took too many Xanax. 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. Also, the record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. 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 expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to rejoin the military and to receive full benefits. At the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is not eligible to reenlist. Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does 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 the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 June 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, 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: No Change 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 AR20180009019 1