1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 December 2019 b. Date Received: 11 February 2020 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he suffered from PTSD and chronic adjustment disorder, for which he subsequently received service-connected disability rating. The disorder affected his service and the reason for the misconduct of drug abuse. He did not receive treatment for his disorder, which caused him to self-medicated and led to his discharge. The applicant states, he was subjected to racism and discrimination from NCOs in his basic training unit. The applicant believed as a Soldier in a combat MOS, he was required to accept the verbal and mental abuse, which they called corrective training. The applicant states, he was lied to about his MOS and nothing made sense to him why he should serve his country and may have to kill multiple innocent people. The applicant states when his grandmother, who was his caretaker died, he was told by his Drill Sergeant, "fuck that old bitch" and that he could not attend the funeral. Eventually he was approved to attend the funeral, and while attending he funeral he was so anxious and stressed that he married Ms. B. J. He believed that if he were to be killed as a single man, it would be by his corrupt peers, but if he were married, someone could speak for him. The applicant states, he contracted herpes from his wife, but was too embarrassed to get treatment and knew the disease was incurable. When he arrived at Fort Hood, the applicant informed his chain of command of his condition. Latter he was accused of being the father of another woman's child and was required to take a paternity test. During this time he was maltreated by his chain of command and called a deadbeat. The test proved he was not the father of the child. The applicant states, he was with another Soldier when he had met a girl and later went to their location. While there, one of the girls gave him a drink and the applicant became suspicious of his surroundings the people who there. Some appeared to be gang members and so the applicant tried to call his friend to pick him up, but he did not receive an answer. After drinking the drink he was given, he became drowsy, when the girl told him to go upstairs. The next thing the applicant remembers was waking up nude and had been robbed. The applicant eventually got home and reported the incident to the police and to his chain of command. The police had told the applicant that there had been many incidents like his where girls drug them and then clear out their bank accounts. The applicant states, he later saw the girl along with a guy, who she had said was his brother at the time of the incident. The applicant fought the guy two separate times, but the club security escorted the guy out of the club. The applicant attempted to detain the girl until authorities arrived, but the applicant's NCO stopped the applicant from holding the girl and she ran off. The applicant later apologized to the applicant and took him to get weed to calm down and drink beer. After the weekend, the applicant was given a urinalysis during the week. The applicant describes how he was completely stressed and had nightmares after viewing vulgar videos, wherein Al Qaeda captives were tortured, raped and had their heads cut off. The applicant states, while on extra duty, the NCO in charge took him to his home where he began to show him many illegal weapons that he had. The applicant was in the home with other privates and began drinking and fell asleep. The next morning the applicant woke up to find the NCO taking pictures of his genitals while standing over one of the privates. The applicant was disgusted and thought that he did not want to go to war with these types of people. Afterwards, the applicant went home where he fell asleep in his vehicle. The next day the applicant received an Article 15 for drinking. The applicant became was depressed and went to the Chaplain who spoke to his commander. The applicant was called into the office where the Article 15 was tore up, and was told if the Article 15 were to continue, it would continue while they were in war. He was told by SSG T. that he was going to make it his business to not allow the applicant to get out of the Army. The applicant further details his contentions in a self- authored letter provided with the application. 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 with depressed mood/with disturbance of emotions and conduct; Alcohol Abuse; Cannabis Abuse; Partner Relational Problem, Relational Problem. No documentation of applicant's claimed VA diagnoses of PTSD or Chronic Adjustment Disorder is found in the electronic VA medical record, JLV. The applicant is not service-connected from the VA. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is partially mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 November 2020, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (MST). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. (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: 31 May 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 May 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 18 October 2006, the applicant submitted a urine sample during a probable cause urinalysis that tested positive for Marijuana. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 May 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 7 May 2007, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 May 2007 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 April 2006 / 3 years, 17 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / GED / 94 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / 19K10, K4 M1 Armor Crewman / 1 year, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 26 October 2006, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 23 (marijuana), during an Probable Cause (PO) urinalysis testing, conducted on 18 October 2006. CG Article 15, dated 15 November 2006, for wrongfully using marijuana (October 2006). The punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $297 pay (suspended); and, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Report of result of Trial, reflects the applicant was tried in a Summary Court-Martial on 21 March 2007. The applicant was charged with two specifications of violating Article 112a. The applicant was found guilty of both specifications consistent with the plea for the following: Between 1 December 2006 and 5 December 2006, wrongfully use Amphetamines. Between 18 November 2006 and 22 November 2006, wrongfully use amphetamines. Sentence: confinement for 30 days. Two Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Confined by Military Authorities (CMA)" effective 21 March 2007; and, From "CMA" to "PDY," effective 14 April 2007. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 23 days (CMA, 21 March 2007 - 13 April 2007) / Released from Confinement j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his post- service medical treatment record, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with: Anxiety Disorder; Panic Disorder; Anxiety Reaction. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Two DD Forms 293; self-authored statement; medical treatment records. 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. 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 marred the quality of his service. 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 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 that he was harrased and discriminated by members of his chain of command; however, 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. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. Accordingly, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant contends he was suffering from undiagnosed PTSD and chronic adjustment disorder, which affected his behavior and led to his discharge. The applicant contends the VA has granted him a service connected disability for PTSD. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. 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 4 November 2020, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (MST). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20200001883 1