1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 8 May 2019 b. Date Received: 7 June 2019 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The counsels on behalf of the applicant seek relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, the applicant's military record, as a whole, does not support characterizing his discharge as General (Under Honorable Conditions). Therefore, he is entitled to an upgrade on justice and equitable grounds. The applicant served honorably in Afghanistan. He experienced several traumatic incidents that contributed to the ultimate diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Despite suffering from his combat experiences and traumas, he was noted for his exemplary service and received an ARCOM for reestablishing critical means of communication during combat. He also received an AAM and CAB. Upon his return, he received treatment and therapy for mental health problems. The prescribed medication caused him to be in a zombie-like state. He was unable to perform simple daily tasks. He was determined to be a suicide risk and that he had depression, anxiety, insomnia, and paranoia, which resulted in multiple hospitalizations and emergency room visits. Further exacerbating his problems, was a new chain of command that did not believe that he truly suffered from then undiagnosed, service-related PTSD. His commanding officer subjected him to unjust harassment due to his PTSD. The combination of his zombie-like state and the harassment he received led him to self-medicate his PTSD by smoking marijuana and subsequently, he tested positive on a urinalysis for marijuana. He then received an Article 15 punishment. His medical records show that it was only after his return from deployment that his dependence on marijuana and alcohol began. It is highly unlikely that he would have self-medicated, had it not been for his PTSD, prescription drugs, and being harassed by his chain of command. Since his discharge, he sought treatment with the VA. His mental health problems, sustained through combat service, along with his GD, have caused him to be homeless for prolonged periods, unemployed, and to suffer the stigma associated with less-than-honorable discharge. Despite the diagnoses of PTSD and bipolar disorder, he sought to overcome his mental health problems by seeking employment and returning to school at his own expenses. He does not have access to the educational benefits he deserves, thus he struggles to maintain employment and pay for a college degree. The applicant's circumstances warrant an upgrade, because the behavior and conditions that led to his discharge, including the harassment from his commanding officer, were direct results of his service-connected PTSD and its consequences on his physical abilities, and in light of the arguments for equity and justice, along with the Kurta Memo's "liberal consideration." The circumstances of his service, the mental anguish he has suffered from his combat-related PTSD, the undue stigma he suffered since his discharge, and his post-service commitment for self-betterment, all make his discharge unjust and inequitable based on the totality of his life and circumstances; thereby, warranting an upgrade to Honorable. He is also entitled to an upgrade based on the grounds of justice and equity by his post-separation growth, dedication to personal development, and his desire to shed the stigma of a less than honorable discharge and to contribute professionally to society. He contributed immeasurably to this country and should be treated appropriately. 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; Adult physical abuse; Alcohol Dependence; Borderline Personality Disorder; Cannabis Abuse; Maltreatment Physical Abuse, confirmed; Military Combat Stress Reaction; PTSD. The applicant is 90% service-connected 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 September 2020, 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 (service- connected PTSD diagnosis). 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: 14 March 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 February 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between 4 August 2014 and 4 September 2014, the applicant wrongfully used marijuana, a Schedule I controlled substance. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 11 February 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 February 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 March 2012 / 3 years, 30 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25Q10, Multichannel Transmission Systems Operator/Maintainer / 3 years, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (23 February 2013 to 16 November 2013 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AAM; NDSM; ACM-CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR; NATO MDL; CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: An Electronic Copy of the DD Form 2624 (Specimen Custody Document - Drug Testing), dated 19 September 2014, indicates the specimen collected on 4 September 2014, on an "IR" (Inspection, Random) basis, provided by the applicant, tested positive for "THC." Counseling statements for testing positive during a urinalysis; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time; and failing to obey an order or regulation. FG Article 15, dated 15 January 2015, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 2 September 2014, being derelict in the performance of his duties on 28 August 2014, and wrongfully using marijuana between 4 August 2014 and 4 September 2014. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $969 pay per month for two months (suspended) and 30 days of restriction. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Reports of Medical Examination and History, dated 9 October 2014 and 25 September 2014, reflect that the applicant and examiner noted the applicant being treated for PTSD, respectively. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 12 December 2014, reports and "AXIS I" diagnoses as "PTSD (Complex), R/O Dis-associative Disorder NOS - (History of extreme and severe child abuse)"; "AXIS II" as "Borderline Personality Disorder"; and "AXIS III" as "mTBI." The Report also remarked, in pertinent part, that at the "time, it [was] advisable to treat [the applicant] as having a very severe psychiatric illness. Treating him as faking or malingering would be a mistake." That those "with a severe abuse history [were] more likely to commit suicide and become violent or act out when under duress. Strongly advise against using threats of punishment or harsh discipline for the time being as this will not have the desired outcome, but rather trigger reactions from the [applicant] and entrench symptoms." The applicant's documentary evidence: Medical Records, dated 17 March 2015 (at page 197) and throughout the medical records, show the applicant being treated for behavioral health issues and PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 8 May 2019, with attorneys-authored petition and list of Exhibits, labeled Exhibit A thru Exhibit E. 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 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 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 contends his discharge was inequitable and unjust, because of the totality of his life and circumstances, the behavioral health conditions, and the harassment by his commanding officer exacerbating his service-connected PTSD and its consequences on his physical abilities, were carefully considered. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements through his counsel alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues resulting from his combat tour, the unjust harassment, and subsequent diagnosis of PTSD, 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. 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 accomplishments and complete period of service were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The applicant contends an upgrade would allow him to have access to the educational benefits he deserves and pay for a college degree, and help him to maintain employment. 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. Further, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 September 2020, 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 (service-connected PTSD diagnosis). 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 AR20190010137 6