1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 December 2017 b. Date Received: 28 December 2017 c. Counsel: None 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, would like an upgrade of discharge for the purpose of being able to focus primarily on school while supporting the family. The applicant had suffered so many physical and mental issues since combat in Iraq. However, has completely turned life around since the completion of a PTSD Program. The applicant is now trying to continue full time in college to obtain a degree as a Recreational Therapist to help fellow combat Vets. The applicant isolated oneself and self-medicated for years due to mental issues which lead to a negative lifestyle. The applicant states that 2010 was the last time there were any major criminal charges. Since the completion of the PTSD Drug Program, the applicant has a completely different outlook on life. The applicant just wants to obtain a degree and help those who suffered similarly. The applicant has finished the first semester but cannot continue without upgrading the discharge in order to get full schooling benefits while supporting three children. The applicant has struggled so much since Iraq and discharge. The applicant has worked so hard to get to this point and make a difference in life and possible the lives of others who have suffered the same. The applicant feels the discharge was inequitable because it was based on self-medication due to mental and physical service connected disabilities at the time. Instead of helping, the applicant was discharged without the proper help in order to continue his military career. 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 did not have any BH diagnosis while on active duty. Post-service, the applicant has a 100% service-connected rating for PTSD from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Opioid dependence, Alcohol Dependence, and homelessness. In summary, although the applicant has a BH diagnosis, it is not migrating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 May 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 April 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 March 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for having received a Field Grade Article 15 for wrongful use of cocaine on 24 November 2006; and While on leave he was charged with possession of drug paraphernalia and possession of a controlled substance (heroine) by the state of Pennsylvania on 13 February 2007. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 6 March 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon receiving a general (under honorable conditions) discharge (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 March 2007 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 March 2006 / 6 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / 92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 1 year, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (5 October 2006 to 3 March 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document-Drug Testing), dated 28 September 2006, reflects the applicant tested positive for COC 238 during a Probable Cause (PO) urinalysis testing conducted on 21 September 2006. FG Article 15, dated 24 November 2006, for the wrongful use of cocaine between 21 September 2006 and 28 September 2006. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $636 per month for two months (suspended), extra duty for 45 days, and oral reprimand. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 22 February 2007, which shows that the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings and was mentally responsible. Also it was noted that the applicant was evaluated and found to not suffer from any psychiatric pathology other than recent alleged substance abuse and a history of substance use that was consistent with dependence. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative or legal actions deemed appropriated by his command. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; statement in support of claim from the Department of Veterans Affairs; statements of recommendation; letter from VA Butler Healthcare; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 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 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 applicant seeks relief contending that he had suffered so many physical and mental issues since combat in Iraq. However he has completely turned his life around since the completion of a PTSD Program. He contends he isolated himself and self-medicated for years due to mental issues which lead him to a negative lifestyle; he states that 2010 was the last time he had any major criminal charges. Since he completed the PTSD Drug Program he has a complete different outlook on life. He just wants to obtain a degree and help those who suffered as he did. He has finished his first semester but cannot continue without upgrading his discharge so he can get full schooling benefits while supporting his three children. He has struggled so much since his time in Iraq and discharge. He has worked so hard to get to this point and make a difference in his life and possible the lives of others who have suffered the way he did. He feels his discharge was inequitable because it was based on his self-medicating due to his mental and physical service connected disabilities at the time. Instead of helping him, he was discharged without the proper help he needed so he could continue his military career The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with the application, and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishments. Also the independent medical documents submitted by the applicant from the VA Butler Healthcare indicating he was deemed at the end of 2015 as 100 percent service connected for PTSD was noted. However, the fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. Additionally, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts and as a result separation action was initiated. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of continuing full time in college to obtain a degree as a Recreational Therapist to help fellow combat Vets like himself. 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 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 1 May 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 AR20180000487 1