1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 11 September 2019 b. Date Received: 16 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, his discharge was improper and inequitable. He is 100 percent service connected for PTSD. His friends are dying left and right. He was recommended for Medical Evaluation Board discharge by Dr. B. and was denied by the post CSM. 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 Acute Stress Disorder; Anxiety Disorder NOS; Cannabis Dependence; Opioid Dependence; Opioid-Induced Mood Disorder; PTSD. The applicant is 100% service connected. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Bipolar Disorder, unspecified; Personality Disorder; Other Opioid Abuse; Hypnotic or Anxiolytic Abuse; Physical Aggression; Psychotic Disorder NOS; Panic Disorder; Depression NOS. 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 16 October 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, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH, and service-connected PTSD diagnosis), prior period of honorable service, and post-service accomplishments. 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. (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: 25 March 2011 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 February 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he wrongfully used Oxycodone and Oxymorphone between (3 October 2010 and 7 October 2010. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 14 February 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon his receiving a characterization of service or description of separation no less favorable than a general, (under honorable conditions) discharge. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 February 2011 / the separation approving authority reviewed the conditional waiver with the separation packet. After careful consideration of all matters, he accepted the conditional waiver and directed the applicant be separated from the United States Army with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 October 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 years / HS Graduate / 121 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 4 years, 6 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 21 September 2006 to 12 October 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska / SWA / Iraq, 8 July 2007 to 15 November 2007 / Afghanistan, 1 March 2009 to 10 March 2010 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-CS, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, NATO MDL, CIB, EIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Positive urinalysis test coded IR (Inspection Random), dated 7 October 2010, for OXCOD and OXMOR. CID Report of Investigation, dated 16 December 2010, reflects the applicant was under investigation for wrongful possession and wrongful use of opiates. FG Article 15 dated, 27 January 2011, for wrongful use of Oxycodone between (3 October 2010 and 7 October 2010); and wrongful use of Oxymorphone between (3 October 2010 and 7 October 2010); reduction to SPC / E-4, forfeiture of $1,115 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. The applicant received a negative counseling statement for a positive drug test. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 28 January 2010, revealed the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of opioid mood disorder and PTSD. Given his diagnosis and the circumstances which led the applicant to begin abusing substances while deployed and continue to abuse them after re-deployment, the applicant is eligible for an MEB and that is the recommendation of his BH therapist and substance abuse counselor. The applicant's command was informed of this recommendation and will make the decisions that they feel is appropriate. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. VA benefits letter, dated 30 June 2015, revealed the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD with panic disorder without agoraphobia and granted an evaluation of 100 percent disabling. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); support statement, Hawaii State Senator; applicant's information paper; Ranger Creed; The Pensacola News Journal, K.C., Obituary; LaRue County Herald News, W.G., obituary; Alaska Dispatch News, J.S.; 1SG's support statement (three pages); recommendation for award; support statement; honorable discharge certificate; CIB Orders 239-192; VA benefits letter; University of Hawai'i System Campus Course Evaluation; Kapi 'Olani Community College STEM monetary Award; individual jump record; hazardous duty orders 142-406; two DD Forms 214; EIB Certificate; and an oath of reenlistment. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: He attained a 4.0 grade point average the past semester at Kapi 'Olani Community College and seeking a dual degree in Astrophysics and Molecular Biology. 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. 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. 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 an NCO. The applicant, as an NCO, 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, his discharge was improper and inequitable. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his discharge was improper and inequitable. The applicant further contends, he is 100 percent service connected for PTSD. The record shows that on 28 January 2010, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was diagnosed with an opioid mood disorder and PTSD. The applicant provided a VA benefits letter, that revealed the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD with panic disorder without agoraphobia and granted an evaluation of 100 percent disabling. The applicant also contends, his friends are dying left and right. However, 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 additionally contends, he was recommended for MEB discharge by Dr. B. and was denied by the post CSM. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined in the documents with the application. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. However, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH, and service-connected PTSD diagnosis), prior period of honorable service, and post-service accomplishments. 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. 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 / 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 AR20200000038 4