1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 30 March 2017 b. Date Received: 6 March 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant served the entire four year and four month enlistment contract. The applicant served the first deployment honorably and earned the Combat Infantry Badge for service, as well as many meritorious awards. The applicant admitted to the chain of command the mistake to smoke hash out of a cigarette with Afghanistan Army Soldiers to cope with stress and anxiety. The applicant was not properly rehabilitated after this incident and was held for months, criticized and given criminal labor by the new unit. The applicant is now a proud father of a one-year-old daughter, who has brought clarity to life. The applicant has long attempted to avoid the mental problems since exiting from the military. Whether it be masking issues with the temporary happiness alcohol has to offer, or shield oneself from the clutches of society, the applicant has not been open or honest with oneself. Since the daughter's birth, the applicant has come to realize that accepting and embracing the pain will help overcome the battle with posttraumatic stress. The applicant states it is okay to ask for help and has been sober for some time. The applicant's goals and priorities have evolved into a more positive and constructive lifestyle. The applicant wants to continue to better oneself, be the best father, and not live in a past that haunts. When the applicant first was discharged, the applicant did not believe in needing to seek help, felt guilty and thought one did not deserve the help. The applicant believes once being free of the government's grasp, it would that fix the problems and going home to caring people would absolve these deep issues? After six years of gradually worsening issues, two failed relationships, and one lovely baby girl, the applicant finally gained the perspective one needed. The applicant further details the effects of stress on life in a self-authored statement. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, notes indicated medical and behavioral health diagnoses. The SMs electronic military medical records revealed diagnoses of an Adjustment Disorder and Cannabis Abuse. Post-service, SM does not have a percentage rating from the VA. In summary, the applicant did not have a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 August 2018, 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 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 15 September 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 March 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: Under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, Commission of a Serious Offense, the applicant was informed of the following reasons: He went AWOL from 12 July until 11 August 2010 and he smoked hashish. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 6 July 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 6 July 2011, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: In July 2011, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14- 12c, Commission of a Serious Offense. / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 June 2007 / 4 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / HS Graduate / 118 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 4 years, 2 months, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Afghanistan (25 October 2010 - 15 August 2011) / Iraq (27 November 2007 - 5 January 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ICM-2CS, ARCOM, VUA, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 14 September 2010, for being AWOL (between 12 July and 11 August 2010). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $723 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. FG Article 15, dated 20 February 2011, for wrongfully using hashish (between 5 January and 5 February 2011). The punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $733 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: The applicant's DD Form 214, does not reflect any lost time. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 9 February 2011, reflects the applicant was cleared for ANY administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with an Occupational Problem. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; and, a self-authored statement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: He states, he is a father and a productive member of his community. 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(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. 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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. 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 marred the quality of his service. 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 was suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress, which effected his behavior. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 9 February 2011, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. Further, the service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder 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 contends that he was not properly rehabilitated after his incident. However, AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier. Further, AR 600-85, paragraph 3-8 entitled self-referrals, states the applicant could have self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) counseling center for assistance. The applicant contends he was held for months after his enlistment and was criticized and given criminal labor by his new unit. However, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. The applicant contends that he had good service which included two combat tours. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. 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 August 2018, 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 AR20170006603 1