1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 12 November 2018 b. Date Received: 12 December 2018 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and to change the narrative reason for discharge and its corresponding codes. The counsel-authored brief on behalf of the applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, following the applicant's return from Afghanistan, the applicant suffered from depression, anxiety, feelings of isolation, and other symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The applicant was also involved in a motor vehicle accident in which he tore the ACL and meniscus in the left knee and subsequently underwent surgery. The applicant does not recall receiving any warnings about the risk of addiction associated with the use of Tramadol, an opioid, for surgical pain. The pain and physical struggles recovering from the surgery was a long and painful process, and lasting several months, which intensified the depression, anxiety, feelings of isolation and symptoms of PTSD. The applicant became reliant on the opioids prescribed by the physician as means to address both the physical pain and intense symptoms of PTSD. The single failed drug test was driven by the undiagnosed and untreated PTSD. The applicant served honorably from enlistment in 2010 and throughout a deployment in Afghanistan, including during combat. The mitigating circumstances surrounding the incident, including PTSD and reconstructive knee surgery, and an otherwise exemplary service record, make anything less than honorable, an inequitable discharge. The applicant had no incidents of previous misconduct and served with distinction. The applicant dutifully acknowledged the wrongful use of MDMA (Ecstasy) and pursued all corrective actions as instructed by the chain of command. The applicant was young and unsure of how to appropriately address these mental health issues at the time and made an impulse mistake. Immediately following discharge, the applicant sought mental health counseling, and within months, was diagnosed with PTSD. Despite ongoing treatment, the applicant continues to struggle with the symptoms of PTSD, and through persistent efforts with PTSD treatment, is currently drug-free. The applicant has started working towards a college degree with hopes of serving as an example and mentor for other veterans struggling with PTSD. The facts of the applicant's case falls within the guidance of the Kurta Memorandum. Therefore, given an otherwise flawless military record and in light of the mitigating circumstances surrounding the isolated incident, the current discharge is inequitably harsh and should be upgraded, and the narrative reason changed to "'Secretarial Authority'" with its corresponding separation code and the reentry code to "1." The applicant states, in effect that since discharge, has completed the "Ward 8 program" which helps with managing ongoing symptoms. The applicant plans to continue with counseling. The applicant has also held a variety of jobs and excelled in many different fields, but nothing compares to being a Soldier. The applicant desires to rejoin the military, if allowed to. 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 diagnosis of ADHD, Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety, Amphetamine Abuse and Anxiety Disorder NOS. The applicant is 100% service- connected for PTSD from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with PTSD, Cocaine Use, Alcohol Use, Opioid Dependence, ADHD, and Depression. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis which is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 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, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of 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), 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: 26 March 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 26 February 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant wrongfully used MDMA (Ecstasy) between 21 November 2012 and 26 November 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 March 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: By an undated memorandum / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 July 2010 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 8 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska, SWA / Afghanistan (21 April 2011 to 13 April 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; NDSM; ACM-2CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR; NATO MDL; CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: An Electronic Copy of the DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 11 January 2013, indicates the specimen collected on 26 November 2012, on an "IU" (Inspection, Unit) basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for "MDMA." Negative counseling statement for violating Article 112a, UCMJ, by wrongfully using illegal drugs, and being recommended for enrollment in ASAP. FG Article 15, dated 19 February 2013, for wrongfully using MSMA (Ecstasy) between 21 November 2012 and 26 November 2012. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $758 pay per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 12 February 2012, indicates the applicant and examiner noted behavioral health issues. The applicant's documentary evidence: (Note that the applicant submitted voluminous medical records containing information on behavioral health issues) VA letter, dated 22 August 2017, indicates the applicant was granted 30 percent service- connected disability for PTSD. Health Records, dated 26, 27 November 2012, notes "Primary insomnia" and "Adjustment disorder with anxiety" as chronic issues. (Pages 269, 272-273, 283) Health Records, dated 21 September 2012, indicates the applicant receiving therapy for adjustment disorder with anxiety. (Page 292) 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 12 November 2018, with its Table of Contents listing attachments 1 and 2, and Exhibit A through Exhibit F. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The counsel on behalf of the applicant states, in effect, immediately upon the applicant's discharge, he sought counseling to address his issues and through his persistent efforts, he is now drug-free. He has also started working towards a college degree with hopes of serving as an example and mentor for other veterans struggling with PTSD. The applicant states, in effect, that he had a variety of job and excelled in many different fields, but nothing would compare to being a Soldier. 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 and to change the narrative reason for his discharge and its corresponding codes. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that 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 serious 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. 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's contentions regarding his pain and physical struggles recovering from a surgery, which intensified the depression, anxiety, feelings of isolation and the symptoms of PTSD he was suffering from upon his return from Afghanistan, 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. The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire military career. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's character and performance, including recognitions of his good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incident of misconduct, and his post-service accomplishments, 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 and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service if allowed to. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The applicant requests to change the reason for his separation; however, the narrative reason for his separation is governed by specific directives and as approved by the separation authority. The narrative reason specified by AR 635-5-1 for a discharge under Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is JKQ. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. 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 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 15 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, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of 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), 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 AR20190000122 1