1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 May 2017 b. Date Received: 22 May 2017 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, was a good Soldier and did what was asked during military service. The applicant believes, as a young Soldier, may have made some mistakes and did some things wrong, but has since matured and grown. The applicant has been embarrassed and disgraced by what the discharge reflects and would like to clear it up. It was a stressful at the time and the applicant was a young Soldier in a place where there was daily uncertainty of being alive. The applicant was like many fellow Soldiers who made errors and now wants to clear up any intentional or unintentional mistakes that may or may not have made. The applicant wishes there had been an opportunity to stay in the service because the applicant was moving up in rank and believes, if had been allowed to stay, would have continued to be a great Soldier. The applicant's other than honorable discharge has been bothersome for years and the applicant claims has not been the same since serving in Iraq. The applicant would like to be able to use the veteran status and have pride. The applicant states upon receiving a flag at the father's funeral, it was a proud moment and would love to leave a clean record so the children will be proud when the applicant is gone. The applicant comes from a history of proud military men and women and would like for this to continue. 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 the applicant had no BH contacts while on active duty. VA records indicate that the applicant has been diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Cannabis Dependence. In summary, the applicant did 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 25 January 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 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 26 September 2006 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 12 August 2006 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On divers occasions, between on or about 1 November 2005 and 31 January 2006, he accepted bribes; Between on or about 1 January 2006 and 31 January 2006, he attempted to distribute a controlled substance; On or about 31 December 2005, he distributed a controlled substance; Between on or about 1 November 2005 and 30 November 2005, he used a controlled substance; Between on or about 1 November 2005 and 28 February 2006, he possessed a controlled substance; Between on or about 1 November 2005 and 28 February 2006, he violated a General Order; and, Between on or about 25 May 2006 and 24 June 2006, he used a controlled substance. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 14 August 2006, the applicant waived his rights to consult with a JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 21 August 2006, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 September 2006 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 18 November 2003 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 93 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92F10, H7 Petroleum Supply Specialist / 2 years, 10 months, 9 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Iraq (15 October 2005 - 14 September 2006) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ICM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 12 July 2006, reflects the applicant tested positive, during an Probable Cause (PO) urinalysis testing, conducted on 24 June 2006. FG Article 15, dated 2 August 2006, for: On divers occasions between on or about 1 November 2005 and on or about 31 January 2006, wrongfully accept from a TCN fuel truck driver some amounts of cash as compensation for adjusting the amount of fuel actually received, an official matter in which the United States was and is interested, to wit: the transfer of fuel from TCN trucks to the fuel farm at Q-West. The applicant, did, at or near Q-West, Iraq, between on or about 1 January 2006 and on or about 31 January 2006, attempt to distribute some amount of marijuana. This is in violation of Article 80, UCMJ. The applicant, did, at or near Q-West, Iraq, between on or about 31 December 2005, wrongfully distribute some amount of valium, a controlled substance. This is in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The applicant, did, at or near Q-West, Iraq, between on or about 1 November 2005 and on or about 30 November 2005, wrongfully use valium, a controlled substance. This is: in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The applicant, did, at or near Q-West, Iraq, between on or about 1 November 2005 and on or about 28 February 2006, wrongfully possess some amount of marijuana. This is in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The applicant, did, at or near Q-West, Iraq, between on or about 1 November 2005 and on or about 28 February 2006, violate a lawful general order, to wit: paragn1.ph 2a, MNC-l General Order #1, dated 15 October 2005, superseded by paragraph 2a, MNC-I General Order # 1, dated 2 May 2006, by wrongfully purchasing and possessing a privately owned firearm. This is in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. The applicant, did, at or near Q-West, Iraq, between on or about 25 May 2006 and on or about 24 June 2006, wrongfully use marijuana. This is in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $636 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 31 July 2006, reflects the applicant had a clear thinking process and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with Cannabis Abuse. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application and DD Form 214. 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. 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 young and immature at the time of the discharge. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. 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 applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow him to use his veteran's status. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits do 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 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 25 January 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 AR20170008154 1