1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 January 2017 b. Date Received: 9 January 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, an upgrade would allow him to received VA health benefits. Upon returning from a deployment in Iraq and as a combat veteran, the Army did not have programs in place for behavioral health support. The fact that he was processed for an involuntary discharge due to his positive urinalysis, while others in the same unit with positive results were not separated, appears unfair. He was diagnosed with PTSD, maniac depression and anxiety. He started dealing with thoughts of suicide after his redeployment. He ingested narcotic to change his mood and it became "the norm." He sought assistance through SPC W., who brought him to the hospital and when blood was drawn, it confirmed what he told the doctor that he had taken a substance. The following day UCMJ actions were taken. He would like to have the honorable service of his first enlistment documented. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. However, due to the nature of the misconduct, PTSD is not a likely cause of misconduct. Therefore, a nexus between PTSD and the misconduct is not likely. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 April 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, homelessness, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH and PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 14 December 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 June 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 12 April 2004, he received a FG Article 15 for wrongfully using cocaine. He received numerous negative counseling statements for being drunk on duty and failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 8 June 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: 17 September 2004, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (Note that the board provided additional recommendations with its justification on memorandum, dated 17 September 2004) (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 30 November 2004 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 October 2003 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19D1P, Cavalry Scout / 3 years, 8 months, 23 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (22 March 2001 to 19 October 2003) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (25 March 2003 to 24 March 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 24 April 2002, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 19 March 2002. This punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction. Negative counseling statements for drinking on duty; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; and disobeying an NCO. FG Article 15, dated 12 April 2004, for wrongfully using cocaine between 4 January 2004 and 4 February 2004. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $668 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Administrative Separation Board summarized proceedings with its findings and recommendations. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Memoranda, dated 13 April 2004, and 6 February 2004, indicates the applicant was seen for an emergency mental health evaluation due to possible suicidal ideation. Medical records, dated 11 February 2004 and 6 February 2004, provided reports and diagnosis of the applicant's behavioral health issues, such as history of depression, and treatment, and an "Axis I: Depressive Disorder, NOS R/O Dysthymia" diagnosis. Report of Medical History, dated 2 June 2004, indicates the applicant and the examiner noted behavioral health issues and treatment. The administrative separation board summarized proceedings address the applicant's behavioral health issues upon redeployment from Iraq. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 3 January 2017; self-authored statement; Crime Victims' Compensation Program benefits Information document; supporting statement; Honorable Discharge certificate; and Oath of Reenlistment certificate. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's available/record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. 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. By the incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends an upgrade would allow him to obtain VA health benefits. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of obtaining veterans' benefits. Further, eligibility for veterans' 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 applicant contends that he was processed for an involuntary discharge due to his positive urinalysis, while others in the same unit with positive results were not separated, appears unfair. However, the method in which another Soldier's case was handled is not relevant to the applicant's case. Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues which involved being diagnosed with PTSD, maniac depression and anxiety, and that he started dealing with thoughts of suicide after his redeployment, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. The applicant contends he served honorably during his first enlistment and he would like to have his honorable service documented. However, the applicant's requested change to the DD Form 214 does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 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 April 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, homelessness, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in- service diagnosis of OBH and PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD Code to: No Change f. Change 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 AR20170001463 1