1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 1 July 2015 b. Date Received: 6 July 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: 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 did not submit any issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. 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 applicant was seen while deployed for a concussion December 2010 with no reported behavioral or cognitive deficits. Followed up in 2013 with concern for memory and concentration problems, but no further evaluation was completed. Diagnosed with Insomnia May 2013 and seen for two sessions. ASAP treatment for Alcohol Dependence and Cocaine Abuse from February - May 2014, discharged unsuccessfully. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 September 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: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200 / Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-4 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 30 May 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 May 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge: tested positive for cocaine during a urinalysis (24 February 2014); and, received an administrative General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for driving under the influence and driving with an open container of alcohol (24 March 2014). (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 May 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: Undated / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 1 March 2012 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 23 / Associate’s Degree / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 68W10, Health Care Specialist / 5 years, 3 months, and 6 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA, 25 February 2009 - 28 February 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (14 September 2010 - 24 August 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWTSM, ASR, CMB g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document – Drug Testing), dated 20 March 2014, reflects the applicant tested positive for cocaine during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing conducted on 24 February 2014. GOMOR, dated 24 March 2014, reflects the applicant was reprimanded for DUI and driving with an open container on 24 March 2014. The applicant received two negative counseling statements for a positive urinalysis test. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: DA Form 2697 (Report of Medical Assessment), 27 March 2014, indicates the applicant had TBI and concussion issues; he also received a DUI; and prescribed medications for treatment. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, dated 1 July 2015. 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 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for alcohol or drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. Army policy states an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service. However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process. 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 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 applicant did not submit any issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. 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 7 September 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 VA - Veterans Affair ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150011380 4