1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 March 2016 b. Date Received: 4 March 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he earned various awards and decorations. He did not receive any substance abuse or psychological treatment prior to his discharge. He served in Iraq in an infantry unit and was exposed to varying difficult experiences, injury and other stressful situations. He returned from deployment and experienced extreme paranoia, nightmares, difficulty transitioning to a non-combat scenario, inability to cope, and extreme anxiousness. His anxiety, inability to relax, the fear, or getting any sleep resulted in a diminished mental state. He began to self-medicate in order to function, feel normal, and be able to sleep. An attachment shows his discharge was characterized as honorable. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant did have a mitigating medical condition for most offenses (illegal substance use x 4) but not all (i.e. AWOL, disrespect, failure to obey orders, etc....) which led to his separation from the Army. A limited review through the JLV (Joint Legacy Viewer) of the applicant's Veterans Affairs records notes 3 problems (transfer from DoD). The Veterans Affairs has not service- connected the applicant In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 June 2017, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. self-medication for physical injuries sustained in a combat zone), 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 reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 29 December 2005 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Charges Were Preferred: 27 October 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates on 27 October 2005, , the applicant was charged with the following offenses; he wrongfully used marijuana x2 (12 August 2005 and 12 September 2005) and (4 September 2005 and 4 October 2005). (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 December 2005, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 December 2005 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 January 2004 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 years / GED Certificate / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11B10, Infantryman / 1 year, 11 months, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, specific dates not in file f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 1 September 2005, for wrongful use of marijuana (17 June 2005 and 18 July 2005); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $617 pay for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Two CID Reports of Investigation, dated 18 August 2005 and 13 September 2005, revealed that the applicant was the subject of investigations for wrongful use of marijuana. Two positive urinalysis tests coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 13 September 2005 and 4 October 2005, both for THC. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL x2 for 8 days (2 September 2005 to 8 September 2005) and (21 September 2005 to 22 September 2005); modes of return unknown. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); two DD Forms 214; self- authored statement; two letters, Director, Case Management Division; and a VA, statement of the case in the appeal (eight pages). 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 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered 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 the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, he earned various awards and decorations. 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 did not receive any substance abuse or psychological treatment prior to his discharge. The record of evidence shows the applicant admitted in a counseling statement dated 25 October 2005, as of 4 October 2005, he was enrolled in ADAPS and admitted to having a problem. The applicant also contends, he served in Iraq as an infantry and was exposed to varying difficult experiences, injury and other stressful situations; and he returned from deployment and experienced extreme paranoia, nightmares, difficulty transitioning to a non-combat scenario, inability to cope, and extreme anxiousness. The service record does not support the applicant's contentions, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication. The applicant also contends, his anxiety, inability to relax, the fear, or getting any sleep resulted in a diminished mental state. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his mental or medical conditions resulted in a diminished mental state. The applicant additionally contends, he began self-medicating in order to function, feel normal, and be able to sleep. 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. Lastly, the applicant contends, an attachment shows his discharge was characterized as honorable. The VA, statement of the case document, which the applicant contention refers to shows that discharge was characterized as honorable. However, the DD Form 214 is the official discharge document; and that document revealed that at the time of discharge the applicant was issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 21 June 2017, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. self-medication for physical injuries sustained in a combat zone), 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 reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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 / RE Code to: No Change f. Restore (Restoration of) 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 AR20160005420 5