1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 September 2019 b. Date Received: 17 September 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 was discharged due to misconduct related to his alcohol / drug addiction. His drug problem resulted from a back injury while on active duty. He received a rating through the VA for depression, anxiety and PTSD. He used drugs and alcohol to relieve himself from pain caused his back injury. 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 Alcohol Intoxication; Opioid Intoxication. The applicant is 80% service connected, 70% for Major Depressive Disorder. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Major Depressive Disorder with anxious distress. In summary, the applicant does not have 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 16 October 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 14 November 2008 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 October 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he failed to report to his appointed place of duty numerous times, disobeyed a lawful written order by drinking, wearing civilian clothes, not returning to his proper living quarters, and leaving post while in Phase IV. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 October 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 January 2008 / 3 years, 32 weeks / moral waiver, 11 December 2007 b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 years / GED Certificate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / None / 10 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: None g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 28 August 2008, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x3 (29 June 2008, 30 June 2008 and 8 July 2008); and having knowledge of a lawful order issued by CPT P., an order which it was his duty to obey, did fail to obey the same by consuming alcohol while in Phase IV (30 June 2008); forfeiture of $314 pay for one month (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 2 October 2008, relates there was no psychiatric diagnosis that would require disposition through medical channels. He was cleared for any action deemed appropriate by Command. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct; missing class, failing to meet course standards and notification of pending separation action. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA Rating Decision, dated 23 August 2019, revealed the applicant was service connected with an evaluation of a major depressive disorder, with anxious distress, severe, opioid use disorder, stimulant use disorder (previously rated as adjustment disorder with depressed mood, chronic, mild (claimed as insomnia, PTSD, sleep disturbances, and drug abuse), which was currently 30 percent disabling, was increased to 70 percent disabling, effective 16 July 2019. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages, dated 13 September 2019); and a VA Rating Decision (three pages); DD Form 293 (two pages, dated 27 October 2019); letter, Acting Director, Case Management Division; Letter, National Personnel Record Center, with partial separation documents (two DD Forms 214, executive summary, CG Article 15, two pages, five developmental counseling statements and a VA Letter). 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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. By the documented pattern of misconduct, the applicant 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 was discharged due to misconduct related to his alcohol / drug addiction. The record of evidence shows that the applicant was discharged for failing to report to his appointed place of duty numerous times, disobeyed a lawful written order by drinking, wearing civilian clothes, not returning to his proper living quarters, and leaving post while in Phase IV. The applicant further contends, his drug problem resulted from a back injury while on active duty. The service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant also contends, he received a rating through the VA for depression, anxiety and PTSD. The applicant provided a VA rating decision, that shows he was service connected with an evaluation of a major depressive disorder, with anxious distress, severe, opioid use disorder, stimulant use disorder (previously rated as adjustment disorder with depressed mood, chronic, mild (claimed as insomnia, PTSD, sleep disturbances, and drug abuse), which was currently 30 percent disabling, was increased to 70 percent disabling, effective 16 July 2019. The applicant additionally contends, he used drugs and alcohol to relieve himself from pain caused back injury. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Community Counseling Center and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. The service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code as 4. The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code / RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that Soldiers processed for a pattern of misconduct will be assigned an SPD Code of JKA and an RE Code of 3. 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 16 October 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20190012454 5