1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 April 2019 b. Date Received: 1 May 2019 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The counsel on behalf of the applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, the applicant, a veteran of the Afghanistan conflict, was awarded CAB. The applicant was diagnosed with service-connected PTSD by VA. The applicant served as a superior Soldier during most of the service with two ARCOMs. According to the Kurta memorandum, VA's determination/diagnosis with PTSD is considered persuasive evidence; that the applicant's conditions/experience is service-connected; liberal consideration must be given to the applicant because of PTSD affected the applicant's conduct; and the applicant's drug rehabilitation failure was not a misconduct. The mitigation arising out of the applicant's PTSD is not outweighed by the severity of any misconduct. The applicant's official military personnel file does not contain any adverse information warranting a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. 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 depressed mood, Hallucinogen Dependence, and Nicotine Dependence. The applicant is 50% service-connected for PTSD from the VA. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnosis is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 April 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Drug Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635- 200, Chapter 9 / JPC / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 30 July 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 October 2012 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / HS Graduate / 102 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist / 3 years, 9 months, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (4 October 2010 to 11 October 2012) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (25 February 2012 to 29 November 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2; AAM; NDSM; ACM-2CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR; NATO MDL; CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: There are no record of any negative counseling statements or actions under the UCMJ. However, the applicant's ERB shows that the applicant was reduced to Private/E-2 on 27 February 2014, and Private/E-1 on 16 June 2014. Discharge Orders i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant's documentary evidence: VA letter, dated 15 April 2019, indicates the applicant had 50 percent disability for PTSD. VA Progress Notes, dated in August 2015, notes symptoms relating to PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 14 April 2019; DD Form 214; reenlistment documents; two Recommendations for Award with ARCOM certificate; AAM certificate; CAB Permanent Orders; three character reference/ supporting statements; Medical Records (July 2013 through December 2013, July 2014); VA Progress Notes, dated 14 August 2015; and VA letter, dated 15 April 2015. 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 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for alcohol or drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. Army policy states that an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge is authorized depending on the applicant's overall record of service. However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process. 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 "JPC" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for drug rehabilitation failure. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JPC" 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. After carefully examining the applicant's available military records, there are insufficient mitigating factors to make a determination upon the merit of the applicant's issues. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the event(s) which led to the discharge from the Army. However, record further contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 9, for "Drug Rehabilitation Failure" with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. The DD Form 214 shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JPC and a reentry (RE) code of 4. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the complete discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The applicant's contentions regarding his service-connected PTSD diagnosis, were carefully considered. A careful review of 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. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to any 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. 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 April 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: 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 AR20190007116 1