1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 9 April 2015 b. Date Received: 16 April 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 was suffering from depression and he self-medicated. He overcame depression and has been a productive member of society. His discharge prevents him from achieving his full potential and utilizing resources that could be available to him. 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 condition(s) for the offense which led to his separation from the Army. The Active Duty electronic medical records were reviewed. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 July 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, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 5 May 2006 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 March 2006 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant tested positive for marijuana on divers occasions (4 November 2005, 11 January 2006, and 1 February 2006) (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 29 March 2006 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: Undated / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 3 June 2004 / 4 years and 20 weeks b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-3 / 92G10, Food Service Operations / 1 year, 10 months and 19 days 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: Summarized Article 15, dated 3 August 2005, for violating a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully staying overnight in barracks room 307, building 3219 (18 July 2005). The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction. Laboratory Confirmed Biochemical Test Results, stamp dated 15 November 2005, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC during an Inspection Random (IR) based urinalysis conducted on 4 November 2005. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 20 December 2005, indicates the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in administrative and judicial proceedings. He was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command. FG Article 15, dated 12 January 2006, for wrongfully using marijuana between (5 October 2005 and 4 November 2005); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $617 pay for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days. DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 15 February 2006, reflects the applicant was charged with wrongfully using marijuana. Laboratory Confirmed Biochemical Test Results, stamp dated 13 February 2006, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC during two Inspection Random (IR) based urinalysis conducted on 11 January 2006 and 1 February 2006. Summary Court-Martial, dated 30 March 2006, the applicant was found guilty of wrongfully using marijuana between (12 December 2006 and 11 January 2007). He was sentenced to a forfeiture of $849 pay and confinement for 30 days. Four DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated between 3 March 2006 and 27 April 2006, reflect the applicant’s duty status changed as follows: From “Present for Duty (PDY)” to “Absent Without Leave (AWOL),” effective 2 March 2006 From “AWOL” to “PDY,” effective 15 March 2006 From “PDY” to “Confinement by Military Authority,” effective 30 March 2006 From “Confined by Military Authority” to “PDY,” effective 23 April 2006 The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct; and initial/monthly counseling statements. i. Lost Time: 15 days (AWOL, 2 March 2006 - 15 March 2006). The applicant was also confined by military authorities for 23 days (30 March 2006 - 23 April 2006); however, this period is not annotated on the applicant’s DD Form 214 block 29, dates of time lost during this period. j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 9 April 2015. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states in his application he is a full-time corrections officer, and a part-time case manager for a private company that is contracted through the prosecuting attorney’s office. 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. 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. 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. 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.” 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, and the issues 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. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, 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 at the time of his separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, he was suffering from depression and he self-medicated. The service record contains no evidence of a diagnosis of depression and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, 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 also contends, he overcame depression and has been a productive member of society. The applicant is to be commended for his effort. However, this contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. The applicant additionally contends, his discharge prevents him from achieving his full potential and utilizing resources that could be available to him. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 July 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 AR20150006603 5