1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 December 2016 b. Date Received: 19 December 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, wants to utilize VA education benefits to expand on the training received while serving on active duty. The applicant wants to achieve the goal of living a productive, clean and sober life without the stigma of a general discharge due to poor choices for coping with PTSD stressors. The applicant completed several courses and programs in order to detox from marijuana and to learn positive and healthy coping skills in order to avoid returning to drug use. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Cannabis Abuse. The applicant is 20% service-connected; 10% for TBI from the VA. The applicant does not currently have a diagnosis of PTSD. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 November 2019, 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: 20 December 2012 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 December 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; tested positive for illegal use of THC (marijuana), MET (methamphetamine) and AMP (amphetamine) all Schedule II controlled substances, on two separate occasions between (26 October 2012 and 14 November 2012). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 December 2012, applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 December 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 April 2011 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / HS Graduate / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 2 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 25 August 2009 to 26 April 2011 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 1 July 2010 to 27 April 2011 f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, NOPDR, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Two positive urinalysis tests coded IR (Inspection Random), dated 26 October 2012 and 14 November 2012, for (amphetamine, methamphetamine, marijuana and marijuana); respectively. CG Article 15dated 2 October 2012, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x3 (17 September 2012, 19 September 2012 and 20 September 2012); and failure to obey a lawful regulation, by wrongfully failing to shave (18 September 2012); reduction to PFC / E-3 (suspended), forfeiture of $462 pay (suspended), extra duty for 14 days and an oral reprimand. 20 November 2012, the suspension of punishment of reduction to PFC / E-3 (suspended), forfeiture of $462 pay (suspended), was vacated for the new offense of without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (26 November 2012. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 December 2012, relates the applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI, both screens were negative. There were no observed behavioral abnormalities, no evidence of thought disorder or psychotic symptoms. He was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative / board proceedings. He met retention standards prescribed in AR 40-501 and there was no psychiatric disease or defect that warranted disposition through medical channels. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct; monthly / performance counseling and being recommended for separation. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 31 days, 17 February 2010 until 17 March 2010; mode of return unknown. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); Certificate, Outstanding Performance; sports article; Certificate of promotion level four; Certificate, Tennessee Valley Teen Challenge, Inc.; and a Certificate of participation, Living Free Seminar. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The veteran is also engaged m martial arts courses in order to maintain a healthy and productive lifestyle. He is currently ranked a Level 4 Black Belt and has competed in several multi-national competitions. 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. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service 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 a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment 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 characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors 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. Caution shall be exercised 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, the issues and documents 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 wants to utilize VA education benefits to expand on the training he received while serving on active duty. 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 applicant further contends, he wants to achieve his goals of living a productive, clean and sober life without the stigma of a general discharge due to poor choices for coping with PTSD stressors; and he completed several courses and programs in order to detox from marijuana and to learn positive and healthy coping skills m order to avoid returning to drug use. The applicant is to be commended for his efforts. However, the issues the applicant submitted are not matters upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because they raise 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 service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined in the documents with the application. 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 6 November 2019, 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 a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: 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 AR20170001132 1