1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 12 September 2017 b. Date Received: 18 September 2017 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). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, new evidence not present at the time of his discharge may have affected the character of his discharge. He was diagnosed with PTSD resulting from combat supporting Iraqi Freedom (OIF2). His actions during the last 222 days of his enlistment did not reflect the overall honorable character of his service as a whole; and his conduct was not premeditated. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant had a medical or behavioral health condition that was partially mitigating for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 22 June 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. severe Family matters and post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and as a result 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 narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 18 July 2006 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 May 2006 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he tested positive for cocaine and marijuana (THC) (28 November 2005); he was AWOL (8 December 2005 until 14 April 2006), and he tested positive for cocaine, amphetamine and methamphetamine (19 April 2006). (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 23 May 2006 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 5 July 2006 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 November 2003 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 years / HS Graduate / 111 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25Q10, Multichannel Transmission Systems Operator / Maintainer / 2 years, 4 months, 6 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / SWA / Iraq, 8 August 2004 to 26 July 2005 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Positive urinalysis test coded IR (Inspection Random), dated 28 November 2005, for COC and THC. FG Article 15, dated 6 December 2005, for wrongful use of cocaine between (22 October 2005 and 25 October 2005); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $617 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Positive urinalysis test coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 19 April 2006, for COC, DAMP and DMETH. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and his pending separation action. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 128 days, 8 December 2005 until 14 April 2006, mode of return unknown. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Review PTSD disability benefits questionnaire, dated 3 March 2017, relates the applicant has an Axis I diagnosis of PTSD, Axis 2, alcohol use disorder, and Axis V, social. The applicant met DSM 5 criteria for PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (two pages); VA Form 21-0781, Statement in support of claim for service connection for PTSD (two pages); VA Form 21-0960P-3, Review PTSD disability benefits questionnaire (six pages); and a notarized support statement. 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 under other than honorable conditions to general (under honorable conditions). 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, new evidence not present at the time of his discharge may have affected the character of his discharge. 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 further contends, he was diagnosed with PTSD resulting from combat supporting Iraqi Freedom (OIF2). The record of evidence shows that the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. The applicant also contends, his actions during the last 222 days of his enlistment did not reflect the overall honorable character of his service as a whole; and his conduct was not premeditated. The service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The third party statement provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. However, the person providing the character reference statement was not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none this statement did not provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 22 June 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. severe Family matters and post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and as a result 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 narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 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 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 AR20170016888 1