1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 October 2018 b. Date Received: 21 November 2018 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge should be upgraded due to improperly diagnosed PTSD. The applicant feels mental health was not taken into consideration during the discharge process. A discharge upgrade would help to access education benefits. The applicant plans to become a lawyer and the discharge could affect the career. The applicant wants to be a role model for society and most importantly, to the family and kids. The conduct was primarily driven by self-medication in an attempt to find relief from PTSD symptoms. The VA granted an evaluation of 100 percent for service-connected disability for PTSD and 10 percent for TBI. The applicant was very young when exposed to the horror and trauma of war, resulting in deep psychological wounds. 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 Acute PTSD, Acute Reaction to Stress, Acute Stress Disorder, Adjustment Disorder, Alcohol Abuse, Alcohol Dependence, Concussion, Major Depression, Anxiety Disorder, and Nightmare Disorder. The applicant is 100% service-connected for PTSD and 10% for TBI from the VA. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is partially mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 2 October 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI), and combat wounded. 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: 13 July 2011 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 June 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he failed to obey a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully smoking Spike 99, a synthetic drug (21 February 2010); he violated a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully being in possession of and using a synthetic drug known as K2 (6 December 2010); and he violated Kentucky revised statute 244.085, by wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the legal age of 21 (18 March 2011). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 23 June 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 30 June 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 September 2009 / 3 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 years / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 1 year, 9 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 10 June 2010 to 5 October 2010 f. Awards and Decorations: PH, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATO MDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 8 April 2010, for failing to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully smoking Spike 99, a synthetic drug (21 February 2010); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $337 pay (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 14 days and oral reprimand. Military Police Report, dated 8 December 2010, revealed the applicant was under investigation for possession of prohibited substance K2, on post. Military Police Report, dated 19 March 2011, relates the applicant was under investigation for underage drinking, assault, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, on post. FG Article 15, dated 21 April 2011, for violating a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully being in possession of and using a synthetic drug known as K2 (6 December 2010); and violating Kentucky revised statute 244.085 as assimilated into federal law by Title 10 U.S.C., Section 1, by wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the legal age of 21 (18 March 2011); extra duty and restriction for 45 days. The applicant received two negative counseling statements regarding possession and use of illegal drugs, underage drinking and debt counseling. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 25 May 2011, indicates the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of anxiety disorder not otherwise specified. He was screened for PTSD and mTBI in accordance with OTSG / MEDCOM policy Memo 10-040, and the results were negative. He was psychiatrically cleared for Chapter 9 consideration per his command. VA letter, dated 23 March 2018, revealed the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. He met the strict DSM V criteria for PTSD. He received treatment with medications as well as psychotherapy. The applicant submitted an ebenefits rated disabilities documents that shows an evaluation for PTSD of 100 percent and a TBI evaluation of 10 percent. Of note, this document does not have the applicant name or social security number to indicate this documents belongs to the applicant. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); attorney's brief in support of application (two pages); Exhibits 1-26 (124 Pages); Exhibit 1, DD Form 214; Exhibit 2, Combat Action Badge Orders Number 357-007; Exhibit 3, Purple Heart Orders with Certificate; Exhibit 4, applicant's personal statement; Exhibits 5 and 8, Military Police Reports 2010 and 2011 MPC033 (15 and 16 pages, respectively); Exhibit 6, sworn statement; Exhibit 7, April 22 2011 memorandum (two pages); Exhibit 9, FG Article 15; Exhibit 10, Article 15 punishment worksheet; Exhibit 11, administrative separation recommendations; Exhibit 12, 10 U.S.C. 1553 (two pages); Exhibit 13, Army Regulation 15-180 (four pages); Exhibit 14, Hagel Memorandum (two pages); Exhibit 15, 2017 Clarifying Guidance (five pages); Exhibit 16, Report of Mental Status Evaluation (three pages); Exhibit 17, T.T, VA Letter; Exhibit 18, rated disabilities; Exhibit 19, GAO Report (13 pages); Exhibit 20, The Link between PTSD and Substance Abuse/ Addiction (seven pages); Exhibits 21-24, support / character statements; Exhibit 25, Fullerton College email; and Exhibit 26, Fullerton College Paralegal Studies Requirements (two pages). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant through counsel states he earned an associate degree in History and started family, including a two-year old daughter. 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, 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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. 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. By the misconduct (serious offense), the applicant 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 requests a change to the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. 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 regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, his discharge should be upgraded due to improperly diagnosed PTSD; and he feels his mental health was not taken into consideration during the discharge process. The applicant bears the burden of presenting of substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was improperly diagnosed for PTSD his mental health was not considered during the discharge process. The applicant further contends, a discharge upgrade would help him access his education 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 applicant also contends, he plans to become a lawyer and his discharge could affect his career. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The applicant additionally contends, he wants to be a role model for society and most importantly his family and kids. The applicant is to be commended for his efforts. However, 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. Furthermore, the applicant contends, his conduct was primarily driven by self-medication in an attempt to find relief from his PTSD symptoms. He 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. Moreover, the applicant contends, the VA granted him an evaluation of 100 percent for service- connected disability for PTSD and 10 percent for TBI. The applicant submitted an ebenefits rated disabilities document that shows an evaluation for PTSD of 100 percent and a TBI evaluation of 10 percent. Of note, this document does not have a name or social security number to indicate this documents belongs to the applicant. Also, a VA letter revealed the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. He met the strict DSM V criteria for PTSD. He received treatment with medications as well as psychotherapy. Lastly, the applicant contends, he was very young when exposed to the horror and trauma of war, resulting in deep psychological wounds. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. 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. As such, none of these statements 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 2 October 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI), and combat wounded. 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 AR20190000331 2