1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 29 May 2015 b. Date Received: 1 June 2015 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 received multiple injuries while serving in the Army that have required surgeries. He received a service connected disability rating of 90 percent. Simply because of his physical condition he should have received an honorable discharge. He was in treatment for depression and alcoholism, which was a result of his struggle with his disabilities and failure of treatment. He was told by his command that he was not able to be medically discharged for his physical disabilities because his unit was forced to separate him for misconduct. He is very discontent with the fact that he had nowhere to turn to after destroying his body while serving. He cannot believe that he was lied to on multiple occasions by his command in regards to seeing a medical review board. His situation was not addressed appropriately. He desires the upgrade so that it does not weigh on his conscience and that he may use his GI Bill. He believes he earned the benefit and would like the funds to finish law school. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had no mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses. The Active Duty electronic medical records were reviewed. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 August 2016, 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: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 31 May 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 1 May 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant tested positive for THC (marijuana) (1 February 2007 and on 21 February 2007, however, the results indicate the positive was residual from the first test). (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: Declined, 1 May 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 10 May 2007 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 31 March 2004 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 74D1P, Chemical Operations Specialist / 3 years and 2 months d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 14 March 2005, for being disrespectful in language towards an NCO (19 February 2005). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of $323.00 pay (suspended), and 7 days of extra duty. On 7 April 2005, the suspended portion of the punishment was vacated. The vacation was based on the applicant wrongfully having a blood alcohol level of .05 percent during mission cycle (19 March 2005). Six DA Forms 4856 (Developmental Counseling), dated between 19 March 2005 and 8 February 2007, for testing positive on a drug urinalysis for marijuana, ASAP failure, missing company callout while on mission cycle, missing formation, drunk on duty and on mission, and for failing to obey a lawful order or regulation. CG Article 15, dated 14 April 2005, for wrongfully having a blood alcohol level of .05 percent during mission cycle. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $288.00 pay (suspended), and 14 days of extra duty. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 7 February 2007, reflects the applicant tested positive for marijuana during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing conducted on 1 February 2007. FG Article 15, dated 1 March 2007, for wrongfully using marijuana (between on or about 1 January 2007 and 1 February 2007). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $605.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 1 March 2007, reflects the applicant tested positive for marijuana during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing conducted on 21 February 2007. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation (memo), dated 19 March 2007, indicates the applicant had psychiatric conditions of such severity which would warrant disposition through Chapter 13. The applicant was cleared for whatever administrative action deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) Anxiety Disorder NOS and (Axis II) Borderline Personality Disorder. VA Letter, dated 17 August 2010, shows in part, the applicant was rated 50 percent disability for Anxiety Disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 29 May 2015; VA letter, dated 17 August 2010; and a CD containing his digital medical records. 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. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members’ discharges. “Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre-existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service.” “Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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 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, 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 marred the quality of his service. 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. The applicant contends he should have been medically discharged; however, Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. The applicant contends he was lied to on multiple occasions by his command. However, 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 contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, 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 that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 August 2016, 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: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable 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 OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150009484 5