1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 31 August 2016 b. Date Received: 6 September 2016 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, due to complications during a surgery, pain management became unbearable. He states, he had to self-medicate because the Army medications left him unbalanced. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had no AHLTA records. JLV showed no VA service-connected disability percentage. He has no BH diagnoses in the VA at this point. He had a Separation MSE on 10 September 2002 that cleared him for administrative actions. His separation medical exam of 15 September 2002 showed a 111111 profile. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 October 2017, 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 / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 11 December 2002 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 October 2002 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between on or about 5 May 2002 and 3 June 2002, he used THC (marijuana). Between on or about 1 June 2002 and 3 June 2002, he used AMP (amphetamine). Between on or about 1 June 2002 and 3 June 2002, he used MDA (methylenedioxy- amphetamine). Between on or about 1 June 2002 and 3 June 2002, he used DMET (methamphetamine). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 15 October 2002 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 October 2002 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 3 October 2000 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / GED / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 55B10, Ammunition Specialist / 4 years, 6 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 28 May 1998 - 2 October 2000 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: DD Form 2624, dated 18 June 2002, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC (marijuana), AMP (amphetamine), DMET (methamphetamine), and MDA (methylenedioxamphetamine), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 3 June 2002. FG Article 15, dated 4 August 2002, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 5 May and 3 June 2002); and, for wrongfully using amphetamine, methylenedioxyamphetamine and methamphetamine (between 1 and 3 June 2002). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $619 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 10 September 2002, 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. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and DA Form 2-1. 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 states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 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 he self-medicated after a surgery to cope with the pain, which 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 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 27 October 2017, 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 new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160015670 1