1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 June 2018 b. Date Received: 10 August 2018 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 pertinent part and in effect, the separation was due in part to post-traumatic stress disorder. The additional evidence the applicant is providing was not available at the time of the separation board hearing. Stressors that triggered the PTSD was that the applicant lost a battle buddy while deployed in Iraq; a baby girl was diagnosed with group B meningitis and almost lost her; was separated from the ex-wife; lost a close cousin in line of duty, who was serving in the Navy; the right leg Achilles was surgically repaired; lost a grandmother who raised the applicant; had another surgery that repaired the left leg quad muscle; the divorce was finalized in 2012, and the ex-wife with the children moved three states away; and in 2013, lost a child-that was the breaking point, which triggered the PTSD and the applicant made one bad decision that led to the current discharge. No one looked into what had caused a good Soldier to make such a poor decision. 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 Cannabis Abuse. An off- post provided diagnosed the applicant with PTSD, Major Depressive Disorder, Dysthymia, and GAD. The applicant is 30% service-connected for PTSD from the VA. 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 13 March 2019, 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, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and a prior period of honorable service. 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), and the separation code to JKN. (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-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 11 February 2015 c. Separation Facts: The applicant's OMPF does not contain record of his separation. However, the following information was obtained from the applicant's submitted evidence: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 April 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, the applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 1 March 2013, he tested positive for THC during a command directed urinalysis. His illegal use of the drug constituted an act of serious misconduct. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 April 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: 11 April 2014, General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, pursuant to the findings that warranted separation according to AR 635- 200, paragraph 14-12c. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 June 2012 / Indefinite (USAR-AGR) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / 14 years / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-7 / 91X40, Maintenance Supervisor / 14 years, 3 months, 19 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR (23 October 2000 to 7 November 2000) / NA IADT (8 November 2000 to 30 April 2001) / HD USAR (1 May 2001 to 23 February 2003) / NA OEF MOB (24 February 2003 to 7 June 2003) / HD USAR (8 June 2003 to 7 January 2005) / NA AGR (8 January 2005 to 31 March 2009) / NA (Reenlistment and extension) AGR (1 April 2009 to 18 June 2012) / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (18 April 2008 to 13 March 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM; ARCAM; AGCM-3; NDSM; ICM-CS; GWOTSM; NCOPDR-2; AFRM-M DEV; ASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: Two NCOERs rendered during period of service under current review or since last reenlistment of 19 June 2012: 22 February 2012 thru 21 February 2013, Among the Best 12 March 2013 thru 11 March 2014, Among the Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (According to the applicant's documentary evidence) DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 11 March 2013, indicates the specimen collected on 1 March 2013, on an "IR" (Inspection, Random) basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for "THC." Counseling statement for laboratory result of a command directed urinalysis testing positive for THC. Administrative Separation Board Proceedings, a summarized transcript of the board proceedings, and its reported findings and recommendations are self-explanatory. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant's documentary evidence: Doctor's letter, dated 19 June 2014, indicates that after an extensive mental examinations, the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD (309.81 in DSM V), Major Depressive Disorder (296.23 in DSM V), Dysthymia (300.4 in DSM V), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder (300.02 in DSM V). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 18 June 2018; doctor's letter, dated 19 June 2014. Additional evidence: administrative separation board summarized proceedings with findings and recommendations, and its associated documents; Good Soldier Book consisting of ERB; ten NCOERs; certificate of training; ASAP completion certificate, dated 13 September 2013; six Service School Academic Evaluation Reports; Recommendation for Award (AAM) and certificate; two character reference letters; Request and Authority for Leave, dated 14 March 2014; Results of Controlled Substance Test, dated 8 January 2014, with chain of custody; and applicant-authored statement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. 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, paragraph 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 applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and 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 submitted evidence confirms that his 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, as an NCO, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By the incident of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to these incident of misconduct, and subsequently, the Board can find that his complete period of service and accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues which involved being diagnosed with PTSD, and that numerous stressors triggered his PTSD that resulted in making a bad decision that led to his current discharge, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues along with notable service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. 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 the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 March 2019, 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, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and a prior period of honorable service. 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), 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, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20180016060 1