1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 24 October 2016 b. Date Received: 3 November 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 served in the military for almost 14 years, with over 13 years of continuously honorable service. He states, it began when he was in Afghanistan and he had a really hard time falling asleep. There were days when his unit had to stay awake for overnight guard or other duties and even in these situations, he could not sleep well to rest his body. Sleeping pills did not work and he was feeling exhausted, depressed, and nervous every day. He coped with the situation by thinking, it was part of the deployment and it was not be a big problem. He states, when he finally redeployed home, he was happy to see his wife and daughters, but his conditions were getting worse. His doctor gave him pills to help him with anxiety, stress, sleeping problems, and memory dysfunction, but he continues to have difficulty memorizing things and he forgets recent things. Primarily, he was taking Zoloft and Atarax for his anxiety and counseling for his memory. His doctor eventually raised the dose of his medication to see if it would help him, but his body started breaking down and he started physical therapy and taking additional pills for his knee and back. He states, he was looking forward to serving honorably to the end of his enlistment and wanted to start his life anew, but his family issues, depression, anxiety and suicidal feelings became worse. His most significant issues began while his unit went to a field exercise. At that time, he had almost daily appointments with behavioral health, physical therapy and or marriage counseling. His supervisor wanted him to go to the field and return by bus to attend his appointments. On one occasion, he returned for an appointment, but missed the bus returning to the field due being stuck at a train crossing. He made a call to hold the bus, but the bus left just before his arrival and as a result, his anxiety and stress became worse and he was unable to sleep that night. He states, his supervisors were mad and he did not know what to do, so he went to his appointments and did return to the field. He wanted to face the problem later and remained home for the rest of week until his unit returned, which resulted in him being charged with AWOL and punishment under the UCMJ. One mistake made everything chaotic for him and his career, family, finances and mental condition all became worse. He believed he no longer had a family and the situation led him to make a bad decision to smoke marijuana, which he later tested positive for on a urine test. He states, he became more of a target of his unit his first sergeant threatened that he would be made an example of and he would make sure that his military and civilian life would be ruined. His unit continued to test him for drugs without letting his system clear up just to make sure he was ruined. He was reduced in rank and received an under other than honorable discharge. During a short time, he lost everything and he never received any help from his superiors. There was no effort to help him go through the hardship, but rather they made things harder to ensure that he would be completely ruined. He was given no mercy, even though he asked for help. He believes, if he had not been going through the mental and physical hardships, he would not have behaved in the same way. He would have though more rationally and served his career honorably as required. He states, his brain was not functioning right and he did not seek the correct method to help his situation. He believes he deserves to have his discharge upgraded in order to be treated as a veteran. He understands what he did was not right, but he contends that he had worked harder than many others. He put all his heart into serving the country and he was always proud of what he was doing and still desires to be a part of it, instead of being left out. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has AHLTA diagnoses of Unspecified Adjustment Disorder, ADHD-predominantly inattentive type, Cannabis Abuse - - Continuous, Cannabis Dependence, Family Disruption, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Highly Irritable, Insomnia, Insomnia Due to Environmental Disturbances, Male Erectile Disorder, Marital Problem, Obesity, Occupational Problem, Other Specified Family Circumstances, Parent-child Problem, and Phase of Life Circumstances Problem. The JLV did not show a PTSD diagnosis or a VA SC disability percentage. In a post- deployment questionnaire of 22 May 2012, he denied blast exposure, seeing coalition, enemy, or civilian dead. He also denied a pattern of symptoms consistent with him having PTSD at that time. He has presented a note from the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs student clinic that described him as being treated in 11 sessions for PTSD, though it added the applicant declined to specify what his trauma was. The rest of note mentioned symptoms familiar in his BH history. He also included a neuropsychological report, dated 12 January 2018, which included ADD, Generalized Anxiety, and PTSD diagnoses. In this report he described his first deployment as smooth and his 2nd deployment as the difficult one, though his post-deployment survey for his 2nd deployment is at odds with this account. Based on available records, there was no obvious mitigation for his misconduct, though he was struggling with a variety of difficulties and appears to be a fragile person. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Scott AFB, IL on 28 February 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge and AWOL (i.e. severe family matters and a post- service diagnosis of PTSD and OBH) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 7 October 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: 30 May 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant provided an incomplete copy of his conditional waiver (memo), dated 30 May 2013, which reflects the applicant conditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The memorandum did not include the second page with the applicant's signature. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 January 2012 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 33 / HS Graduate / 113 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 91D10, Power-Generation Equipment Repairer / 13 years, 10 months, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 10 November 1999 -17 August 2003 / HD RA, 18 August 2003 - 29 September 2003 / HD RA, 30 September 2003 - 21 December 2005 / HD RA, 22 December 2005 - 3 January 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Afghanistan (28 November 2005 - 8 March 2006, 29 May 2011 - 14 May 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-3CS, ARCOM-3, JSAM, AAM-2, JMUA, AGCM-3, NDSM, KDSM, HSM, NCOPDR, OSR-4, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 1 April 2011 - 31 March 2012 / Fully Capable 1 April 2012 - 21 March 2013 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Two Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 9 March 2013; and, From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 19 March 2013. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: The applicant's DD Form 214 does not reflect the lost time noted in the previous paragraph. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, treatment summary, dated 2 January 2018, which reflects the applicant had been attending therapy and met the criteria for PTSD, chronic. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; DD Form 214; two character statements; copies of his active duty treatment records; post-service treatment records; and, documents from his military service record and separation packet. 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. 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 honorable. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), by reason of Misconduct (Drug Abuse), with a characterization of service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been protected throughout the separation process. 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 marred the quality of his service. 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's contentions about his discharge was a form of punishment was carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant contends he has been diagnosed post-service with PTSD, and that this condition affected his behavior and ultimately led to his discharge. 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 applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The applicant contends he was not given help and that his command purposely made things harder for him to ruin his career. 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 his overall service record. The applicant contends the event that caused his discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a two combat tours. 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 is to be commended for his accomplishments. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good work performance while in the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. Based on the available record, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): None listed on the hearing data sheet. b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None listed on the hearing data sheet. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): Younhwa Boylan - Spouse - (W) 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Scott AFB, IL on 28 February 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge and AWOL (i.e. severe family matters and a post-service diagnosis of PTSD and OBH) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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. 11. 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 AR20160017316 4