1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 September 2016 b. Date Received: 30 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 was diagnosed with PTSD and TBI while in Italy. His unit was not supportive of him seeking help and having medical appointments, he feels had the Army been supportive of him seeking help, none of this would have happened. He took the route of "self-medicating," desperate for some relief from what was going on within him and ending up failing a drug test. Since his discharge he has maintained a job and been a productive member of society. He also goes to the VA clinic for PTSD therapy and has a PTSD service dog that has been a great help with his daily activities. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time including the applicant's case file, AHLTA and JLV. AHLTA notes indicate applicant has been diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder, Alcohol Abuse, Cocaine Abuse, Marital Problems. AHLTA indicates applicant was seen by ASAP on 9 Aug 2010 after testing positive on UDS for cocaine. At this time, he reported a h/o nightmares related to deployment. Also reported he had been enrolled in ASAP in 2005. On 10 Aug 10, he was seen by FAP where he reported insomnia and nightmares. Seen by Psychiatry on 18 Aug 2010. During this visit, he reported a DUI in Sep 09 for which the charges were dropped. Reported using cocaine in high school and 9 times between May to June 2010. Reported nightmares related to deployment and decreased sleep. Did not meet criteria for PTSD. Diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder. Started on Zoloft and Prazosin to which he had a positive response. Participated in one session of EMDR which he reported he found beneficial for dealing with his trauma. In Nov 2010, during command directed MSE, he reported history of shooting two children at check point, killing 7 terrorists while deployed and extinguishing the flames of some soldiers who were on fire. VA notes indicate applicant is 60% SC, 50% of which is for PTSD. Based on the available information, applicant has a mitigating BH disorder-PTSD. As there is a nexus between PTSD and the use of drugs to self-medicate symptoms, his diagnosis of PTSD is considered mitigating for the offense (wrongful use of cocaine) leading to his discharge from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 January 2018, and by a 4-1 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, board judgement, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service PTSD and OBH symptoms and post- service diagnosis of PTSD with a 50% VA disability rating) 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), and the separation code to JKN. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 10 March 2011 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 14 February 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; wrongful use cocaine a Schedule II controlled substance (22 June 2010); and wrongfully introduced approximately two (2) grams of cocaine a Schedule II controlled substance onto an installation under the control of the armed forces (31 May 2010). (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 14 February 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 23 February 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 December 2008 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 years / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 31B10, Military Police / 7 years, 5 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 1 October 2003 to 28 October 2006 / HD RA, 29 October 2006 to 3 December 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Italy / SWA / Iraq, 7 December 2005 to 6 December 2006 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Positive urinalysis test code IU (Inspection Unit), dated 22 June 2010, for COC. Summary Court-Martial, dated 28 December 2010, the applicant was found guilty of the following offenses; wrongful use cocaine a Schedule II controlled substance on divers occasions between (1 February, 2010 and 22 June 2010); and wrongfully introduced approximately two (2) grams of cocaine a Schedule II controlled substance onto an installation under the control of the armed forces (31 May 2010). He was sentenced to reduction to PFC / E-3 and confinement for 20 days. The applicant received two negative counseling statements for a positive drug test and being recommended for Chapter 14 separation. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 10 August 2010, shows that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of cocaine abuse. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. Report of Medical Examination, undated relates the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder and PTSD; he was prescribed medication for treatment. Report of Medical History, dated 24 January 2011, revealed the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder and PTSD. He was prescribed medication for treatment. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); two DD Forms 214; recommendation for award (five pages); two ARCOMs; AAM; AGCM; ICM-CS; certificate of participation; four Certificates of Achievement; Certificate of Appreciation, Military Police SRT phase 1 course diploma, certificate, Military Police Working Dog Handler Course; Noncommissioned Officer Academy diploma; Service School Academic Evaluation Report; Driver's Badge / with "W" DEV; letter, Director, Case Management Division; VA decision document; and Initial Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Disability Benefits Questionnaire; and a VA, PTSD diagnosis letter. 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 states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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. By the misconduct (serious offense), the applicant 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 was diagnosed with PTSD and TBI while in Italy. The record of evidence shows that the applicant was diagnosed while on active duty with an adjustment disorder and PTSD; he was prescribed medication for treatment. The record does not substantiate a diagnosis of TBI or that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant further contends, his unit was not supportive of him seeking help and having medical appointments, he feels had the Army been supportive of him seeking help, none of this would have happened. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record was not supportive of him seeking help and was unjustly discriminated. 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 applicant also contends, he took the route of "self-medicating," desperate for some relief from what was going on within him and ending up failing a drug test. 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 additionally contends, since his discharge he has maintained a job and has been been a productive member of society. The applicant is to be commended for his efforts. However, these contentions are not matters upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. 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 January 2018, and by a 4-1 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, board judgement, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service PTSD and OBH symptoms and post-service diagnosis of PTSD with a 50% VA disability rating) 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), and the separation code to JKN. 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 / No change to RE code 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 AR20160017952 3