1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 January 2017 b. Date Received: 5 January 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, has in the records a previously approved Medical Board documentation that shows the discharge decision was in full disregard to process and shows purposeful defamation of character. Along with coinciding pre-discharge documentation and Veterans Administration medical approvals and evaluation the current discharge decision shows clear avoidance of professional medical evaluation and recommendation. There also appears to be a disturbing and absolute disregard for openly sought physical, mental and professional attention and help while simultaneously maintaining and achieving daily duties, essentials while passing and advancing required task and training. In light of fully completed and signed documentation, medical evaluation and professional recommendations the basis of discharge shows clear error and failure to properly out-process. The applicant would like to have the discharge changed to an honorable and receive a medical retirement. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Occupational Problems, Cocaine Related Disorder, Cocaine Abuse, Cannabis Related Disorder, Marital Problems, Major Depressive Disorder, and Anxiety Disorder NOS. The applicant is 70% service-connected for PTSD from the VA. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 February 2020, 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, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in- service and post-service diagnoses of OBHI and PTSD). 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, paragraph 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 18 November 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 January 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for having tested positive for marijuana on 27 October 2009 and positive for cocaine on 3 October 2013. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 February 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon his receiving a General (Under Honorable Conditions) Discharge. On 6 June 2014, the separation authority in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 1-33, having received and reviewed the administrative separation packet and the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) proceedings pertaining to the applicant to determine whether he should be processed under administrative separation provisions of AR 635-200 or processed through the physical disability system under the provision of AR 635-40, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation. After careful consideration of all available information, it was determined that the medical condition outlined in the Medical Evaluation Board Report was not the direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct that led to the recommendation for administrative elimination and that there was no other circumstances of his individual case that warrant disability processing instead of further processing for administrative separation. It was directed that the applicant's case be processed under the administrative separation provisions of AR 635-200. Therefore, the applicant's request for a conditional waiver was disapproved and the applicant was referred to an administrative separation board. On 8 July the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board. On 23 July 2014, the administrative separation board, having considered all evidence and testimony, recommended that the applicant be separated for misconduct with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. One board member provided a minority report which recommended that the applicant be separated with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 2 September 2014, the separation authority after reviewing the administrative separation boards findings and recommendations, the minority report, and the applicant's rebuttal matters approved the applicant's separation with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 10 September 2014, the unit received urinalysis results from a random unit urinalysis on 8 August 2014 documenting the applicant's positive result for cocaine use. CID subsequently began a criminal investigation, and on 15 September 2014, the unit requested the applicant's separation order be revoked due to the ongoing criminal investigation with a view toward court-martial. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 6 November 2014 / having reviewed the applicant's previously directed separation packet as well as the Article 15 for additional misconduct the separation authority directed that the applicant's previously approved separation by Major General L.V.P., be reissued with an issuance of a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 October 2008 / 6 years (The applicant extended his enlistment on 7 December 2012 for a period of 5 months giving him a new ETS of 26 March 2015) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS Graduate / 88 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist / 8 years, 5 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 12 April 2006 to 26 October 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (9 November 2007 to 15 January 2009) and Afghanistan (22 October 2011 to 7 August 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM-3, MUC, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, NOPDR-2, ACM-2CS, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 1 September 2012 to 31 January 2013, Fully Capable 31 January 2013 to 8 January 2014, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 4 December 2013, reflects the applicant tested positive for COC 4710>LOL during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing conducted on 3 October 2013. FG Article 15, dated 9 January 2014 for wrongfully using cocaine on 3 October 2013. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $1,213 pay per month for two months (suspended), and extra duty for 45 days. FG Article 15, dated 20 October 2014, for wrongfully using cocaine between 1 August 2014 and 8 August 2014 and failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty X2 on 17 September 2014. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $765 pay per month for two months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days (suspended). Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings, 24 April 2014, indicates that the board found that the applicant had the following medical conditions/defects of PTSD which failed retention standard in accordance with AR 40-501, Chapter 3, paragraph 3-33. Memorandum, dated 20 August 2014, requesting for retention to complete medical separation, submitted by the applicant's defense counsel. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 January 2014 and 21 July 2014, show that the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for PTSD, Depressive Disorder NOS, Cocaine Dependence, and Cannabis Dependence. It was noted that he had been medically referred by to ASAP with recommendation the he attend the RTF inpatient substance abuse program. While this program was not a PTSD treatment program, those issues would be addressed while he received more intensive substance abuse treatment. He was at high risk for relapse on illicit substances due to his PTSD and depression. It was also noted that the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings, and appreciate the difference between right and wrong. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 in lieu of DD Form 293; Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings; Integrated Disability Evaluation System Narrative Summary; Department of Veterans Affairs Claim/Documents to include disability benefits questionnaire; Department of Veterans Affairs decision letter, dated 20 June 2016; and chronological records of medical care. It should be noted; The Department of Veterans Affairs decision letter, dated 20 June 2016, shows the applicant has been awarded 70 percent service connected disability. 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 general (under honorable conditions) discharge 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. Furthermore, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, the applicant compromised the trust and confidence placed in a noncommissioned officer. 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. 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 that he has in his records a previously approved Medical Board documentation that shows the discharge decision was in full disregard to process and shows purposeful defamation of character. Along with coinciding pre-discharge documentation and Veterans Administration medical approvals and evaluation the current discharge decision shows clear avoidance of professional medical evaluation and recommendation. There also appears to be a disturbing and absolute disregard for openly sought physical, mental and professional attention and help while simultaneously maintaining and achieving daily duties, essentials while passing and advancing required task and training. In light of fully completed and signed documentation, medical evaluation and professional recommendations the basis of discharge shows clear error and failure to properly out-process. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, evidence in the records shows that on 6 June 2014, the separation authority in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 1-33, determined that the medical condition outlined in the applicant's Medical Evaluation Board Report was not the direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct that led to his recommendation for administrative elimination and that there was no other circumstances of his individual case that warrant disability processing instead of further processing for administrative separation. It was then directed that the applicant's case be processed under the administrative separation provisions of AR 635-200. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. 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 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 26 February 2020, 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, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of OBHI and PTSD). 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, paragraph 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, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / RE-3 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 AR20170004711 1