1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 31 May 2018 b. Date Received: 14 June 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The Former Service member's father did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. The Former Service member's father also requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. The Former Service member's father seeks relief contending, in effect, requests that the son's discharge be upgraded so that a three year old can take advantage of educational benefits. The son (Former Service member) served in Iraq and developed PTSD at that time and could not get into the VA in a timely manner because of how the VA was ran in the past. The Former Service member's father's request is based on compassion and the relationship of being in combat and not receiving the treatment to sustain the proper meaning to life and making the transition to normal life outside the military. 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 Adjustment Insomnia. VA records indicate the applicant has post-mortem diagnoses of Major Depressive Disorder and PTSD with a 100% service-connection. In summary, the applicant had 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 8 February 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post- service diagnosis of PTSD), 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, 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, Paragraph 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 14 October 2011 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 23 September 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; he wrongfully used marijuana between (7 May 2011 and 6 June 2011). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 1 October 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 5 October 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 June 2007 / 4 years, 21 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 years / HS Graduate / 123 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 14T10, Patriot Operator / Maintainer / 4 years, 2 months, 23 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 8 March 2009 to 18 February 2010 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAAM-2, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Positive urinalysis test coded IU (Inspection Unit), dated 6 June 2011, for THC. The applicant received a negative counseling statement dated, 21 June 2011 for a positive drug test. FG Article 15, dated 20 September 2011, for wrongful use of marijuana between (7 May 2011 and 6 June 2011); reduction to PVT / E1, forfeiture of $733 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days and an oral reprimand.. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL x3 for 25 days, 8 July 2011 to 21 July 2011 for 14 days, mode of return unknown; 23 August 2011 to 29 August 2011 for 7 days; returned to unit and 11 October 2011 to 14 October 2011 for 4 days; mode of return unknown. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA Rating Decision, dated 16 November 2017, relates that the applicant was entitled to accrued benefit payable for service connection for major depression (claimed as PTSD and depression) was granted with an evaluation of 100 percent effective, 13 June 2016 to 29 October 2016. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (two pages); three letters, Director, Case Management Division; VA Letter, accrued reimbursement; two Former Service member's photo IDs; death certificate; and Chapter 14 separation packet (48 pages). 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. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKK" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c(2), misconduct (drug abuse). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKK" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. 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 Former Service member's father did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. The Former Service member's father also requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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 the Former Service member's 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 Former Service member by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier. The Former Service member, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the Former Service member knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. The Former Service member's father provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the Former Service member's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The Former Service member's father also requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKK" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (drug abuse). The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. The Former Service member father requests that his son's discharge be upgraded so that his three year old can take advantage of educational benefits. 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 Former Service member father contends, his son (Former Service member) served in Iraq and developed PTSD at that time, he could not get into the VA in a timely manner because of how the VA was ran in the past. The Former Service member's father submitted a VA Rating Decision, which shows that the applicant was entitled to accrued benefit payable for service connection for major depression (claimed as PTSD and depression) was granted with an evaluation of 100 percent effective, 13 June 2016 to 29 October 2016. The Former Service member father's request is based on compassion and the relationship of being in combat and not receiving the treatment to sustain the proper meaning to life and making the transition to normal life outside the military. However, the applicant 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. Further, this contention is not a matter 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 8 February 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), 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, 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 AR20180015955 1