1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 2 September 2016 b. Date Received: 6 September 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he requests the upgrade so that he can utilize the GI Bill to pursue a higher education. He was in the wake of his previous deployment when he began drinking heavy trying to cope. He had no issues with his command and hate to think one mistake could erase all the good he did. He was an exemplary Soldier, graduating first in his basic training class and maintained that standard throughout his first unit and combat deployment. He suffered a traumatic brain injury in Afghanistan and failed the pre-deployment medical evaluation and was placed on rear detachment. He feels he got the short end of the stick because of an injury he sustained in combat. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the offenses leading to an early separation. In summary, SM exhibited Anxiety and TBI symptoms which can be associated with the use of substances for self-medication, risk-taking behaviors, and impaired judgment, therefore, there is a nexus between this applicant's misconduct (use of cocaine) and his behavioral health symptoms. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 December 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service and an in-service diagnosis of OBH and TBI. Therefore, the board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed 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: 20 February 2009 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 February 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; he wrongfully used cocaine between (4 November 2008 and 10 November 2008). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 2 February 2009. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 February 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 March 2008 / 3 years 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / GED Certificate / 118 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 21B10, Combat Engineer / 2 years, 9 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 25 April 2006 to 29 February 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii / SWA / Afghanistan, 10 March 2007 to 25 May 2008 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, ACM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSRNATO MDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Positive urinalysis test coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 10 November 2008, for COC. FG Article 15, dated 14 January 2009, for wrongful use of cocaine between (4 November 2008 and 10 November 2008); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $699 pay for two months, one month suspended, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 27 January 2009, relates there was no evidence of a psychiatric condition which would prevent the applicant from participating in any legal or administrative actions. He met the retention requirements of Chapter 3, AR 40-501; and does not meet the criteria for a MEB. There was no evidence of an emotional or mental condition of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through medical channels. He was screened for PTSD. Any positive symptoms have been clinically evaluated, treated when requested or if symptoms are medically significant, do not warrant disposition through medical channels, and did not directly contribute to the factors leading to the separation. He was in treatment at TAMC Neurology and SB TBI clinic s/p head injury 14 October 2007 while in theater. He was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative or judicial proceedings. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); and a DD Form 214. 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. 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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents 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 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 seeks relief contending, he requests an upgrade to utilize the GI Bill to pursue a higher education. 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 applicant further contends, he was in the wake of his previous deployment he began drinking heavy trying to cope. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers. The applicant also contends, he had no issues with his command and hates to think one mistake could erase all the good he did. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization of service. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant additionally contends, he was an exemplary Soldier, graduating first in his basic training class and maintained that standard throughout his first unit and combat deployment. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. Furthermore, the applicant contends, he suffered a traumatic brain injury in Afghanistan and failed the pre-deployment medical evaluation and was placed on rear detachment. The applicant underwent a Mental Status Evaluation, dated 27 January 2009, which revealed he was in treatment at the TAMC Neurology and SB TBI clinic s/p for a head injury on 14 October 2007, while in theater. Lastly, the applicant contends, he feels he got the short end of the stick because of an injury he sustained in combat. 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 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 6 December 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service and an in-service diagnosis of OBH and TBI. Therefore, the board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed 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 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 AR20160015857 1