1. APPLICANT’S NAME: a. Application Date: 13 October 2015 b. Date Received: 19 October 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant states, in effect, she did not receive the discharge that she deserved and that her battalion and company did not follow procedures when separating her from the Army. The applicant states that the day she enlisted in the Army was the best day of her life. After being advanced in rank at her one year mark, the applicant felt confident and successful in her job as a 92G. She passed every physical fitness test, never received an Article 15, and always executed what she was told to do. By the middle of April or May 2010, the applicant was notified that she would be deploying in January. On 5 March 2011, the applicant’s life was changed forever. The applicant states that they took incoming from the north and east, requiring everyone return fire. Since that day she states that she has been living a nightmare, she was a complete wreck, unable to sleep or eat. The applicant was moved to a Forward Operating Base (FOB) where she was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The applicant was scheduled to go on Rest and Recuperation (R&R) leave in a few days when she found out that her FOB was under investigation for drugs. Everyone was a suspect; therefore, she was not allowed to go on leave. The applicant had a meeting with the battalion commander and first sergeant. It was then that she told them that she was guilty of using an illegal substance, she was on the edge, and that just a few days earlier she almost blew her head off. Her weapon was immediately taken away, she was placed on suicide watch, and was later told by the Battalion Commander that she would get the help she needed and that she would receive an Article 15. The applicant contends that she does not know why she was lied to, but she understands that using an illegal substance was not the route to go but it saved her life and took the pain and numbness away. The applicant contends that she deserves her Post 9/11 GI Bill. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has a behavioral health condition which was likely mitigating for the offenses which led to her separation from the Army. The applicant's file includes a diagnosis of PTSD from the VA. Review of the Active Duty medical records indicated that the applicant probably had undiagnosed PTSD while still on Active Duty. Because PTSD can be associated with illicit drug use, there was likely a nexus between this applicant's hashish use and her PTSD. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 August 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is now inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and the circumstances surrounding her discharge (i.e. mitigating behavioral health condition, PTSD likely associated with combat and MST) mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. (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 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 23 November 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 September 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant wrongfully used hashish, a Schedule I controlled substance, on divers occasions (between 21 April 2011 and 30 May 2011). (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 16 September 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 11 October 2011 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 11 August 2009 / 4 years and 23 weeks b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-3 / 92G10, Food Service Operations / 2 years, 3 months, and 13 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (9 January 2011 – 20 October 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ACM-CS-2, GWTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: DA Form 3822 (Report Mental Status Evaluation), dated 29 August 2011, reflects the applicant had a clear and normal thought process and was mentally responsible. The applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) Anxiety Disorder NOS; cannabis related disorder. FG Article 15, dated 12 August 2011, for making a false official statement to Special Agent B.H. to wit: “I have not used Hashish or any other controlled substance while deployed to Afghanistan” and wrongfully using hashish, a Schedule I controlled substance. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $734.00 pay per month for two months, 45 days extra duty, and 45 days restriction (suspended). The Separation Authority, along with the applicant’s chain of command, acknowledged the applicant’s filing of an unrestricted report of sexual assault within 24 months of the initiation of separation proceedings. However, it was determined that the applicant’s separation did not appear to be in retaliation for filing an unrestricted sexual assault report; the separation did not involve a medical condition that is related to an allegation of sexual assault; the separation is in the best interest of the Army; and, the separation would not affect any present or future prosecution. U.S. Army Crime Records Center Memorandum, dated 21 June 2016, reflects the applicant was the victim of a sexual assault while assigned to Fort Knox, Kentucky. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: VA Rating Decision, dated 9 October 2015, indicates the applicant’s PTSD diagnosis was upgraded to a 70 percent disabling rating. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 13 October 2015; DD Form 214; and the following: VA Rating Decision Letter, dated 9 October 2015; National Restaurant Association Certificates, dated 13 January 2014 and 11 April 2014; SerSefe Certification, dated 10 October 2013; Server Permit, dated 1 July 2014; and, Two Certifications of Birth. 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. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members’ discharges. “Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre-existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service.” “Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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 her general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the special 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 that ultimately caused her discharge from the Army The applicant contends that she did not receive the discharge she deserved. However, by regulation, a UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct. The applicant’s good record of service was the basis for her receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge. The applicant contends, her battalion and company did not follow procedure when separating her from the Army. 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 her overall service record. The applicant contends that she had good service, which included a deployment to Afghanistan. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of her service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant contends that she was diagnosed with Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and that VA has granted her a service connected disability for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 29 August 2011, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation, which indicates she was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. The applicant’s chain of command determined that although she was suffering from Anxiety Disorder, she knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. Further, there are many Soldiers with the same condition that completed their service successfully. The applicant contends that she deserves her Post 9/11 GI Bill. 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 26 August 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is now inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, and the circumstances surrounding her discharge (i.e. mitigating behavioral health condition, PTSD likely associated with combat and MST) mitigated the discrediting entry in her service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change f. Restore Grade to: No Change AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: 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 BH – Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150017485 1