1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 8 June 2017 b. Date Received: 6 September 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he went through a PTSD event in May and June 2008, wherein a fellow Soldier died. He used marijuana and later tested positive and as a result, his commander, gave him a substance abuse referral. He was told he would be tested again in 30 days, but he was forced to take a drug test 15 days later, while the marijuana was still in his system. After he tested positive a second time, he was discharged. He believes had he been tested properly, he would not have tested positive and he would have honorably finished the remaining three months of his enlistment. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has an AHLTA diagnosis of Anxiety. He did produce an elevated PCL-M score after return from Iraq, but the examiner noted no experience of trauma was reported during the session on 08 June 2009. This was also his Separation MSE. There were no blocks to his administrative separation. JLV showed no VA SC disability percentage; however, his VA Problem List showed a post-service diagnosis of PTSD as early as 2010. On 15 July 2010, he appears to have obtained the diagnosis because he had a positive screen for PTSD. He had presented for treatment because of a fall. A VA C&P MH exam on 02 March 2015 concluded the applicant did NOT meet criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD under DSM-5 criteria and also did not have any other mental disorder that met DSM-5 criteria. The exam on 02 March covers much of the applicant's relevant history. The applicant does not have a mitigating condition. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 June 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 August 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 July 2009 (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 wrongfully tested positive for marijuana on a urinalysis on 4 and 22 June 2009. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 17 July 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 17 July 2009, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14- 12c, Commission of a Serious Offense. / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 July 2006 / 3 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 84 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92F10, H7 Petroleum Supply Specialist / 3 years, 1 month, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (28 January 2008 - 9 January 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 12 October 2008, for disobeying a lawful order (19 October 2008); and, for disrespectful language and deportment toward a noncommissioned officer (19 October 2008). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $352 pay (suspended); and, extra duty for 14 days. Record Of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 17 December 2008, reflects the suspended portion of the punishment was vacated because the applicant was disrespectful in language and deportment toward a noncommissioned officer (10 December 2008). CG Article 15, dated 29 December 2008, for being disrespectful in language and deportment toward a noncommissioned officer (10 December 2008). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $352 pay (suspended); and, extra duty for 14 days. Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 June 2009, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant was mentally responsible with a clear thinking process. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 18 June 2009, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 68 (marijuana), during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 4 June 2009. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 30 June 2009, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 66 (marijuana), during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 22 June 2009. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None 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. 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 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 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 below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 a PTSD event, which affected his behavior. However, 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 his second urinalysis was not proper. 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 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 11 June 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 AR20170018070 4