1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 June 2019 b. Date Received: 12 July 2019 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that his discharge was procedurally defective. The applicant contends that it was not fair, he is a PTSD survivor and his PTSD should have been taken into account, the discharge is unfair now. 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 PTSD. The applicant is 100% connected for PTSD. 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 9 December 2020, and by a 3-2 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 (service- connected PTSD diagnosis), and 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 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 / Chapter 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 21 March 2019 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 July 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: for the wrongful use of cocaine between 4 November 2017 and 7 November 2017 (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 August 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 24 October 2018, the applicant was notified to appear for an administrative separation hearing on 19 November 2018; on 30 November 2018, the applicant was again notified to appear for an administrative separation hearing on 18 December 2018. On 18 December 2018, the board convened to determine if the applicant should be eliminated from the US Army under the provisions of AR 635-200. The applicant appeared with legal counsel. On 18 December 2018, the board found that a preponderance of the evidence supported that between 4 November 2017 and 7 November 2017, the applicant did wrongfully use cocaine. In view of the boards finding, the board recommended that the applicant be separated from military service prior to the completion of his current term of enlistment and that the applicant's be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 27 February 2019, the separation authority, having considered the applicant's medical condition, his service record, and his action of misconduct, found the applicant's condition was not a direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct that led to the recommendation for administrative separation. The circumstance in the applicant's case did not warrant processing under the physical disability system, and that the administrative separation proceedings should continue. It was directed that the applicant be discharged from the U.S. Army and his service be characterized as under other than honorable conditions. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 July 2017 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 33 / HS Graduate / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 19D10, Cavalry Scout / 13 years, 8 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 30 June 2005 to 17 January 2007 / HD RA, 18 January 2007 to 18 February 2013, HD RA, 19 February 2013 to 6 July 2017 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (30 October 2006 to 16 January 2008 and 11 September 2009 to 28 August 2010); Afghanistan (17 November 2012 to 29 June 2013 and 7 February 2015 to 9 October 2015); and Kosovo (5 November 2016 to 17 July 2017) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-6, AAM-4, MUC, AGCM-3, ICM-3CS, NDSM, AFEM, GWOTSM, ACM-2CS, NOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-3, NATOMDL-3, CAB, AAB, g. Performance Ratings: 16 November 2016 to 11 September 2017, Met Standard h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 22 November 2017, reflects the applicant tested positive for COC 1360 during an Inspection Other (IO) urinalysis testing conducted on 7 November 2017. Article 15-6 Findings and Recommendation, dated 13 February 2017. Field Grade Article 15, dated 24 March 2017, for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully possessing alcohol and alcoholic beverages while deployed within the operation are of Kosovo and with intent to prevent its seizure, removed various alcoholic beverage from his room and the room of SFC T.M., property which, he then knew , persons authorized to make searches and seizures were endeavoring to seize, being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces all on 25 January 2017. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-5 (suspended)forfeiture of $1,606.00 pay per month for two months ($800.00 pay per month for two months suspended), and extra duty for 45 days. Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment dated 10 January 2018, which indicates the applicant was command referred for improper use of drugs. Field Grade Article 15, dated 1 March 2018, for wrongfully using cocaine between 4 November 2017 and 7 November 2017. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-5 (suspended), forfeiture of $300.00 pay per month for two months, extra duty for 45 days, and oral reprimand. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 2 March 2018, indicates the applicant was screened for substance use, PTSD, TBI, depression, and military sexual trauma (MST). The applicant was diagnosed with PTSD and id not meet psychiatric medical retention standards IAW ARE 40-501, Chapter 3 and did require referral to an MEB. The applicant was not psychiatrically cleared for administrative separation at that time. It was noted that a decision for administrative or medical discharge should be made by commanding general. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; legal brief; military records; letters of support, and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted 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 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 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. Furthermore, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, the applicant compromised the trust and confidence placed in a noncommissioned officer. The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a honorable discharge. 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 she should have been retained on Active duty. The applicant seeks relief contending that his discharge was procedurally defective. The applicant contends that it was not fair, he is a PTSD survivor and his PTSD should have been taken into account, the discharge is unfair now. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, evidence shows that on 27 February 2019, the separation authority, having considered the applicant's medical condition, his service record, and his action of misconduct, found the applicant's condition was not a direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct that led to the recommendation for administrative separation. The circumstance in the applicant's case did not warrant processing under the physical disability system, and that the administrative separation proceedings should continue. Also, it should be noted the applicant committed an discrediting offense, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service 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 9 December 2020, and by a 3-2 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 (service-connected PTSD diagnosis), and 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), 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 AR20190009468 4