1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 February 2019 b. Date Received: 6 March 2019 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, upgrade would allow the applicant to receive the GI Bill benefits, and transfer educational benefits to the two daughters. Veterans Affairs has evaluated the applicant as 100 percent permanently disabled. At the time of the Article 15, the applicant was going through a tough time, trying to adjust. The applicant was a good Soldier prior to deployment, but after returning, the applicant changed. 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 Disorder with Anxiety and Depressed Mood, Alcohol Abuse, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Cannabis Abuse, Chronic PTSD, Dysthymic Disorder, TBI, and Major Depression. The applicant is 100% service- connected; 70% for PTSD and 40% for TBI from the VA. In summary, the applicant has 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 2 October 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. in-service and post- service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI), and the incapacity to serve. 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), 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: 16 September 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 14 June 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant tested positive for Marijuana. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 17 June 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 August 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (The GCMCA also referred to reviewing both the administrative separation proceedings and the medical evaluation board results, and a determination that neither the applicant medical conditions were a direct or substantial contributing cause of the misconduct that led to his separation, nor the circumstances of the applicant's case warranted disability processing, but instead further processing of administrative separation.) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 October 2008 / 4 years, 29 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91M10, Bradley Fighting Vehicle System Maintainer / 2 years, 10 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (21 November 2009 to 20 November 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; NDSM; ICM-CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR; CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: An Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 9 November 2010, indicates the specimen collected on 2 November 2010, on an "IR" (Inspection, Random) basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for "THC." FG Article 15, dated 9 December 2010, for wrongfully using marijuana between 3 October 2010, and 2 November 2010. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $700 pay per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Negative counseling statements for missing close-out formation, and failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: (also documented by physical profile, Report of Medical History, and health records) Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 3 June 2011, reflects an "AXIS I" diagnoses of "Chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Anxiety Disorder - NOS, Insomnia," and "AXIS III" as "MEB on-going pertaining to BH issues and physical disabilities." Applicant's documentary evidence: Physical Profile, dated 24 January 2011, indicates a permanent S-3 profile was imposed for medical condition of PTSD, severe with psychosis. Memorandum for Commander, dated 25 April 2011, rendered by physician with William Beaumont Army Medical Center, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD on 8 November 2010, and TBI on 19 August 2010. The applicant had been seen by psychiatry and psychology for treatment of his symptoms, both as inpatient and day treatment program. Letter, dated 25 April 2011, rendered by a clinical administrator also related on the applicant's inpatient treatment from 21 January 2011, until 4 February 2011 for psychiatric illness. Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings with its Narrative Summary and its associated documents, dated 15 July 2011, reflect diagnoses of PTSD, chronic, severe, and major depression, recurrent moderate. VA Rating Decision, dated 29 June 2013, indicates the applicant received a 70 percent evaluation for PTSD that included major depressive disorder (also claimed as anxiety disorder and depression), and 40 percent for TBI. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 28 February 2019, with self-authored statement; Recommendation for Award, dated 22 June 2010; memorandum and letter, dated 25 April 2011; Physical Profile, dated 24 January 2011; four counseling statements, dated 24, 25, and 28 February 2011, and 3 June 2011; VA Rating Decision letters, dated 14 November 2012 and 29 June 2013; DD Form 214 (Member-1 copy); and VA discharge certification letter, dated 25 February 2019. 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 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. The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By the serious incidents 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 contends VA evaluated him to be 100 percent disabled. 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. The separation authority considered the medical evidence, and determined that was not the case. The Board is not bound by the separation authority's finding in that regard, and can review that determination. 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 that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veterans' 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. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. 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 2 October 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. in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI), and the incapacity to serve. 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), 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 AR20190003363 1