1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 2 July 2017 b. Date Received: 5 July 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the discharge should be upgraded for medical and because of being a disabled Veteran. 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 no BH diagnoses while on active duty. VA records indicate diagnoses of Major Depressive Disorder and Alcohol Dependence with Alcohol Induced Mood Disorder. In summary, the applicant did not have a BH diagnosis that was mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 22 February 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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 12 August 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 July 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for being found guilty, at a Summary Court-Martial on 1 July 2009, for not being at his appointed place of duty on several occasions (16 March 2009, x2 on 24 March 2009, 30 March 2009, 4 April 2009, 23 April 2009, 28 April 2009, and 1 May 2009), receiving a lawful order from a superior noncommissioned officer on 27 April 2009, which he willfully disobeyed, a violation of Article 91, UCMJ, having knowledge of a lawful order issued by a superior noncommissioned officer, failed to obey the same, a violation of Article 92, UCMJ on 3 March 2009, and between 4 March 2009 and 4 April 2009, wrongfully used marijuana a violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 July 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant previously waived his right to consideration of his case by an administrative separation board via his plea agreement approved by the Commander General, Joint Readiness Training Center and Fort Polk, on 1 July 2009. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 3 August 2009 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 January 2007 / 4 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS Graduate / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 5 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 15 April 2009, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 23 during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing conducted on 4 April 2009. CG Article 15, dated 28 April 2009, for disobeying a lawful order from a First Sergeant by not having the proper uniform on 3 March 2009 and failure to go at the prescribed time to his appointed place of duty on 16 March 2009. The Article 15 document does not show the punishment received by the applicant and it appears the charges were added to the Summary Court-Martial the applicant on 1 July 2009. Summary Court-Martial, dated 1 July 2009 for not being at his appointed place of duty on several occasions (16 March 2009, x2 on 24 March 2009, 30 March 2009, 4 April 2009, 23 April 2009, 28 April 2009, and 1 May 2009), receiving a lawful order from a superior noncommissioned officer on 27 April 2009, which he willfully disobeyed, a violation of Article 91, UCMJ, having knowledge of a lawful order issued by a superior noncommissioned officer, failed to obey the same, a violation of Article 92, UCMJ on 3 March 2009, and between 4 March 2009 and 4 April 2009, wrongfully used marijuana a violation of Article 112a, UCMJ. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, confinement for 30 days, and restriction for 60 days. Memorandum for Record, dated 1 July 2009, which referenced the withdrawal of referral of charges in light of the applicant's submission of an offer to plead guilty, dated 19 June 2009, which was accepted. General Officer letter of reprimand, dated 20 October 2007, which shows the applicant was reprimanded for driving while intoxicated on 16 October 2007. Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 April 2009, which noted that the applicant had the capacity to understand and participate in the evaluation and was mentally responsible. The evaluation did not reveal any psychiatric conditions or symptoms that would impair his ability to participate in the proceedings. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 43 days (1 July 2009 to 12 August 2009), this period of lost time appears to be related to pre-trial confinement. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge 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. Furthermore, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, the applicant 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. 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 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 expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of medical and because he is a disabled Veteran. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, 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 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 22 February 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 AR20170010627 1