1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 February 2019 b. Date Received: 21 February 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, enlisted in the Army Reserve on 31 July 2003. The applicant was discharged from the Army Reserves on 22 April 2009. The reserve obligation end date was 22 September 2010. The separation was due to drug use, specifically, due to a single offense of marijuana use. The year 2009 was a difficult year as the applicant was struggling while serving the country to the best of his ability. The applicant was facing losing parental rights over the son to the State of North Dakota. The son, who was in the custody of the applicant's mother while away on drill, had been removed by child services and was placed in foster-care. During this time, the applicant was struggling to find a stable home, work, and continue with mandatory drills, and was also struggling with untreated mental health issues (depression/anxiety). In order to combat thoughts of self-harming, the applicant used marijuana to self-medicate. The applicant understands these actions were not in compliance with the rules of the Army Reserve. The applicant would like an upgrade of the characterization of discharge, because the applicant served six years, and only faced these issues in the last year of service, during a time-period that the applicant was under extreme stress. The character of my discharge was inequitable because it did not take into account the faithful years of service to the country. Although policies regarding marijuana use have not been changed at the federal level. As the Army modernizes its standard to enlist and reasons for discharging Soldiers, it has to take into consideration mental health care and the use of marijuana to control depression and anxiety. At the time of discharge, the applicant was experiencing significant family problems that affected the ability to serve. The applicant traveled back and forth to North Dakota to visit the son in foster-care and was working on getting a stable home. Although efforts with obtaining custody of the son failed, the applicant is able to keep in contact with the family who adopted the son. The applicant turned life around. The applicant has been gainfully employed by the commonwealth of Massachusetts for the last five years. The applicant is now the provider for a wife and two children-they will be purchasing a home to provide a better life for their children. 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 records regarding the applicant. In summary, there is insufficient evidence to determine if the applicant had 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 25 September 2019, 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: NA / AR 135-178 / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 25 January 2010 c. Separation Facts: The applicant's OMPF is limited to the separation orders. However, the applicant provided a copy of the separation authority's decision memorandum. (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 January 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 22 April 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (Pursuant to AR 135-178, Chapter 12) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 September 2002 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist / d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR (23 September 2002 to 30 July 2003) / NA IADT (31 July 2003 to 17 December 2003) / HD USAR (18 December 2003 - Continuous Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Discharge Orders i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant's documentary evidence: Certification of Health Care Provider for Employee's Serious Health Condition, dated 30 March 2018, indicates that the applicant was under the care of the provider for behavioral health issues. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 13 February 2019; Certification of Health Care Provider for Employee's Serious Health Condition, dated 30 March 2018; DD Form 214; separation authority's decision memorandum; Regimental affiliation certificate; two diploma certificate; email correspondence, dated 5 May 2010 and 29 December 2009; counseling statement, dated 10 January 2009; Chronological Statement of Retirement Points; and Election of Rights response (incomplete). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, he has been gainfully employed by the commonwealth of Massachusetts for the last five years. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. The separation policies throughout the different Chapters in this regulation promote the readiness of the Army by providing an orderly means to judge the suitability of persons to serve on the basis of their conduct and their ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities. Chapter 12 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, and convictions by civil authorities. 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) discharge or an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases. 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) to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. After carefully examining the applicant's available military records, there are insufficient mitigating factors to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the US Army Reserve. However, the record contains a properly constituted set of discharge orders and the applicant provided a copy of the separation authority's decision memorandum. This document identifies the characterization of the discharge as general (under honorable conditions) under the provisions of AR 135-178 and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 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 in the US Army Reserve. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the complete discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The applicant contends that he was having family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. 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. The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge, a drug offense, was an isolated incident. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant contends he was suffering from behavioral health issues, such as struggling with untreated mental health issues (depression/anxiety), and used marijuana to self- medicate. A careful review of the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If based on the available evidence, the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the characterization of service. In consideration of the applicant's post-service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to any incidents of misconduct, the Board can find that his accomplishments and complete period of service, based on the available record, were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The applicant contends his family would like to purchase a home, perhaps an indication that the purchase would be through the use of VA benefits. However, eligibility for veterans' 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. Based on the available 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 25 September 2019, 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 AR20190004475 1