1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 8 August 2019 b. Date Received: 12 August 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he wants his children to see their father was discharged honorably from the Army. He is unable to use his GI Bill with a general discharge. It is humiliating, he believes he served honorably. He began developing symptoms of PTSD while deployed and was not aware of it because he had no knowledge of PTSD. He turned to substance abuse to numb the pain that led to a failed drug test. He did not seek therapy because it was not suggested enough. He feels it was unfair, he should have sought help earlier for PTSD. He is a 100 percent permanent and total disabled veteran. He had a diagnosis of PTSD, which was unknown at the time of discharge. 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% service-connected from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with PTSD, Unspecified Bipolar Disorder, and Substance Use Disorder. 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 28 August 2020, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's 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. (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: 18 July 2006 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 26 June 2006 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he wrongfully used cocaine and failed to report to formation. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 June 2006 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 June 2008 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 August 2005 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 years / HS Graduate / 87 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 4 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 9 March 2004 to 25 August 2005 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 14 October 2014 to 25 September 2005 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CIB, VUA g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated, 15 June 2006, for without authority fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (22 May 2006); and wrongfully use cocaine between (17 April 2006 and 24 April 2006); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $636 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. The record contains a positive urinalysis test coded IR (Inspection Random), dated 24 April 2006, for cocaine. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 16 June 2006, relates the applicant's mood was mildly anxious and mildly depressed. He was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in administrative and judicial proceedings. He was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command. Report of Medical Assessment, dated 20 June 2006, revealed the applicant was under current mental health care for anxiety and depression. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 214; DD Form 215; and a VA letter, summary of benefits. 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. 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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) 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. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier. 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 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 seeks relief contending, he wants his children to see their father was discharged honorably from the Army. 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. The applicant further contends, he is unable to use his GI Bill with a general discharge; and it is humiliating, he believes he served honorably. 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 Department of Veterans Affairs for further the assistance. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual. The applicant also contends, he began developing symptoms of PTSD while deployed and was not aware of it because he had no knowledge of PTSD; and he had a diagnosis of PTSD, which was unknown at the time of discharge. The service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis at the time of discharge and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant additionally contends, he turned to substance abuse to numb the pain that led to a failed drug test. 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. Furthermore, the applicant contends, he did not seek therapy because it was not suggested enough; he feels it was unfair, he should have sought help earlier for PTSD. 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. Lastly, the applicant contends, he is a 100 percent permanent and total disabled veteran. The applicant provided a VA letter, summary of benefits, which shows he was being paid at the 100 percent rate because he was unemployable due to his service connected disabilities. He was considered to be totally and permanently disabled due to his service-connected disabilities. However, the letter did not specifically state what those disabilities consisted of or their nature. 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 28 August 2020, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's 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 AR20190011485 5