1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2016 b. Date Received: 28 April 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he should not be judged based on an isolated incident. He was good at his job and did more than expected of him. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant's sole behavioral health diagnosis in AHLTA was Cannabis Abuse. He received treatment for it from 15 April 2015 until 31 July 2015. He also complained of a concussion from a motor vehicle accident on 27 January 2015. JLV showed no VA contacts of service- connected disability percentages. A pre-discharge Mental Status Exam cleared him for administrative discharge and noted he screened negative for PTSD. As would be expected, given his concussion on 27 January 2015, he tested positive for history of TBI; however, neurologist examined him and did not report abnormal neurological functioning. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 September 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 (Drug Abuse) / AR 635- 200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 16 September 2015 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 June 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; he wrongfully used marijuana between (11 February 2015 and 11 March 2015). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 June 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 July 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 May 2014 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 years / HS Graduate / 94 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 11B10, Infantryman / 1 year, 3 months, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summarized Article 15, dated 12 January 2015, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x4 (14 November 2014, 13 November 2014 x2 and 7 October 2014); and having received a lawful order x2 from SGT C.D., a noncommissioned officer, to prepare a packing list for Inspection prior to 0830 on 5 November 2014 and 0730 on 21 October 2014, an order which it was his duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same x2 (5 November 2014 and 21 October 2014); extra duty for 7 days and an oral reprimand. A positive urinalysis test coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 11 March 2015, for THC. CID Report of Investigation, dated 15 April 2015, revealed that the applicant was under investigation for wrongful use of marijuana. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 5 days (9 September 2015 to 14 September 2015) j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 29 April 2015, relates that the applicant's AHLTA records review confirmed ASAP enrollment and that he was diagnosed with cannabis abuse. He did not meet criteria for any psychiatric diagnosis or condition that warrants disposition through medical channels. He was considered fit for duty according to AR 40-501 and was cleared to proceed with administrative separation. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages). 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. 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." "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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) 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 separation. 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 seeks relief contending, he should not be judged based on an isolated incident. Although an isolated 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 an isolated incident provides the basis for a characterization of service. 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 further contends, he was a good at his job and did more than expected of him. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his [her] service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. 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 15 September 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 AR20160008986 5