IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 11 February 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140001535 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh; based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include, his combat service; documentary evidence showing PTSD issues and diagnosis, and as a result, it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Presiding Officer I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case. THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT: 1. The applicant requests to upgrade the characterization of his service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was undiagnosed after his first deployment, he was treated for anxiety disorder, panic attacks, depression, and received ASAP counseling. His treatment was discontinued and he was sent on another deployment. He returned from that deployment in worse shape—he had serious drug and alcohol issues and the same mental health issues. The VA diagnosed him with PTSD. He feels he was never properly treated. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 15 January 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 17 May 2010 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Drug Abuse, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: A Co, 3rd Bn, 8th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Heavy BCT, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 3 April 2007, 5 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 0 months, 26 days h. Total Service: 5 years, 0 months, 10 days i. Time Lost: 19 days j. Previous Discharges: RA (050420-070402) / HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B10, Infantryman m. GT Score: 117 n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Iraq (081212-091212) and (061001-071002) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2; AGCM; NDSM; ICM-3CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR-2; CIB r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: None t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 April 2005, and reenlisted on 3 April 2007, for a period of 5 years. He was 19 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED). He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B10, Infantryman. He served in Iraq. He earned two ARCOM awards. He completed a total of 5 years and 10 days of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 26 April 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason misconduct – abuse of illegal drugs, specifically for testing positive for marijuana (100119, 070702, and 080715). 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 27 April 2010, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, indicated he understood the impact of the discharge action and elected to submit a statement on his own behalf (NIF). The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 28 April 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 17 May 2010, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, for misconduct (drug abuse), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK, and an RE code of 4. 6. The applicant's record shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) during the period 19 December 2009 through 6 January 2010. There is no record on the mode of his return to military control. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. There are three positive urinalysis reports contained in the record: IU, Inspection Unit, 19 January 2010, marijuana IU, Inspection Unit, 15 July 2008, marijuana IR, Inspection Random, 2 July 2008, marijuana 2. Article 15, dated 24 February 2010, for wrongfully using marijuana (091218-100119). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $723 per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty, and 45 day of restriction (suspended), (FG). 3. Article 15, dated 27 October 2008, for wrongfully using marijuana on two separate occasions (080602-080702 and 070703-080715). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $673 per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction, (FG). 4. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 26 March 2010, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I: Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia and that there was no psychiatric disease or defect which warranted disposition through medical channels. 5. Four negative counseling statements, dated between 28 July 2008 and 9 March 2010, for testing positive during a urinalysis upon returning from Iraq; being separated for the positive urinalysis; testing positive as a third offense; and being recommended for a FG Article 15 and involuntary separation. 6. DAMIS Background Check, dated 1 February 2010, provides a history of biochemical information on positive urinalysis report from 12 September 2005 through 19 January 2010. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided DD Form 214 for service under current review with discharge orders; VA decision correspondence, dated 14 November 2013; medical health records, dated 6 October 2008 through May 2010; ER Patient Care Flow Sheet, dated 10 January 2008; Military Acute Concussion Evaluation, dated 28 June 2009; Montgomery GI Bill Act of 1984 enrolment, dated 20 April 2005; separation packet with separation authority’s memorandum, dated 28 April 2010; preseparation counseling checklist with SGLI election and certificate and record of emergency data; and ERB. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant provided none. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1.  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. 2. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual. 3. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization. 4. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKK" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (drug abuse). 5. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKK" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the documents and issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to honorable for the following reasons: a. Length and quality of service: The applicant served over five years, which included successfully completing his initial enlistment. b. The record confirms the applicant served two combat tours in Iraq. c. The record also confirms he received two ARCOM awards. d. The applicant’s record reflects documentary evidence of his mental health issues and treatment for symptoms of PTSD while on active duty and was diagnosed with PTSD by VA. 3. This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct. The PTSD evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 4. In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 11 February 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 4 No Change: 1 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: Yes Change Characterization to: Honorable Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: NA Change RE Code to: NA Grade Restoration to: NA Other: NA Legend: AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record FG - Field Grade IADT – Initial Active Duty Training RE - Reentry AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable SCM- Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial CG - Company Grade Article 15 HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge CID - Criminal investigation Department MP – Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont) AR20140001535 Page 6 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1