1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 February 2015 b. Date Received: 7 January 2016 c. Counsel: None 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 was an outstanding Soldier until he deployed to Iraq, where he was involved in several IED explosions. As a result, he began suffering from TBI and PTSD; which led to him self-medicating and testing positive on a urinalysis test. He believes that his outstanding record would have remained unblemished had he not been suffering from TBI and PTSD. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had an Adjustment Disorder Diagnosis, and it is not unusual for Soldiers with history similar to his to later receive diagnoses of PTSD. He is now rated 90 percent service-connected disable by the VA but his percentage were not in the notes I reviewed. His treatment for his PTSD has also been minimal. I could find no obvious signs of neurological diagnoses associated with concussion; however, one note JLV indicated that the applicant was seeing a neuropsychologist outside the VA system, which would strongly suggest neuropsychological problems. Based on available evidence and the policy of Liberal Guidance, his cannabis use should, in my judgment, be mitigated. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 April 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. VA diagnosis of PTSD service-connected, in-service diagnosis of TBI, 90 percent VA disability rating) mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changes to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), the separation code to JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. (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: 22 May 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 16 May 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: On 27 April 2007, during a Summary Court-Martial proceeding, the applicant was found guilty for wrongful use of marijuana on two occasions (between 29 January and 28 February 2007) and (between 28 February and 27 March 2007). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 17 May 2007, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 17 May 2007 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 April 2004 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 117 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 1 month, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (28 November 2005 to 19 November 2006) f. Awards and Decorations: PH, ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: A positive urinalysis test coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 28 February 2007, for THC. A positive urinalysis test coded CO (Competence for duty/Command Direct/Fitness for duty), dated 27 March 2007, for THC. A negative counseling statement dated, 28 March 2007, for a positive urinalysis test. Summary Court-Martial, dated 27 April 2007, reflects the applicant was found guilty of wrongful use of marijuana on two occasions (between 29 January 2007 and 28 February 2007) and (between 28 February 2007 and 27 March 2007). He was sentenced to be confined for 15 days, reduced to E-1, and forfeiture of $867 pay for one month. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 May 2007, reflects the applicant met retention requirements of Chapter 3, AR 40-501. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by Command, including separation in accordance with AR 635-200. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: The applicant was sentenced to military confinement for 15 days; however, this period of lost time is not annotated on his DD Form 214 block 29, dates of time lost during this period. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical Examination, dated 10 April 2007, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with anxiety and depression. Report of Medical History, dated 13 April 2007, reflects that the medical examiner indicated that the applicant suffered from anxiety, depression, and insomnia, which he was prescribed Ambien for treatment. Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 13 April 2007, reflects the applicant was having problems with an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depression with anxiety and prescribed medications for treatment. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 and the issues 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. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, 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 at the time of his separation. 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 an outstanding Soldier until he deployed to Iraq. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant further contends, he was involved in several IED explosions and, as a result, he began suffering from TBI and PTSD, which led to him self-medicating and testing positive on a urinalysis test. However, the service record contains no evidence of PTSD nor a TBI diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Furthermore, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant also contends, he believes that his outstanding record would have remained unblemished had he not been suffering from TBI and PTSD. The rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what he believes was an unfair discharge is not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature. The applicant's service record contains a DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document for Drug Testing) that shows the urinalysis test was coded CO which indicates "Competence for Duty/Command Direct/Fitness for duty." The Limited Use Policy applies to this test basis, per AR 600-85. However, the evidence of record contains a certificate of correction that revealed the test basis should read "PO." In view of the aforementioned, it appears the "CO" code for "Competence for Duty" used on the DD Form 2624 was in all likelihood incorrect and should have been coded "PO" for "Probable Cause." If this was in fact a harmless error, then the rights of the applicant were not prejudiced by the error on file in this case. The evidence in the record did not create a substantial doubt that the discharge would have been any different if the error had not been made. 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 5 April 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable. The Board found the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. VA diagnosis of PTSD service-connected, in- service diagnosis of TBI, 90 percent VA disability rating) mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changes to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), the separation code to JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a e. Change SPD/RE Code to: Change SPD to JKN / Change to RE code to 3 f. Restore Grade 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 AR20160002250 1