1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 December 2019 b. Date Received: 12 December 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, an upgrade will allow him to utilize the GI Bill benefit. The applicant states, he was separated for misconduct that stemmed from alcohol and drug abuse. The substance abuse has been related and attributed to post traumatic stress, which he experienced during and after being deployed to Iraq. The degree to which his PTSD has impacted his life has been considerable. The applicant states, he has been sober now for over seven years and the behavior patterns that led to his separation from the Army are no longer part of his life. Within the last year, he was given a disability rating from the VA and has started counseling and continues treatment. 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 Psychoactive Substance Dependence and Alcohol Abuse. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with MDD and PTSD. The applicant is 50% service connected for combat related PTSD. 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 6 November 2020, and by a 5-0 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 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 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 re-entry code to 3. (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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 19 November 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 October 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He used marijuana and therefore tested positive for marijuana on 23 July 2007 and 3 May 2007 and he was AWOL from 21 June 2007 to 18 July 2007. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 23 October 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 29 October 2007 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 July 2005 / 5 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 121 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92F10, H7 Petroleum Supply Specialist / 2 years, 3 months, 9 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (22 April 2006 - 25 September 2006) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 1 August 2007, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 126 (marijuana), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 23 July 2007. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 11 May 2007, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 468 (marijuana), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 3 May 2007. Two Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 22 June 2007; and, From "AWOL" to "Dropped From Rolls (DFR)," effective 18 July 2007. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 30 August 2007, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. Three Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 26 days (AWOL, 22 June 2007 - 18 July 2007) / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; DD Form 214; DD Form 293; Enlisted Record Brief. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has been sober now for over seven years and the behavior patterns that led to his separation from the Army are no longer part of his life. 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 general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. 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 he was suffering from undiagnosed PTSD, 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 record reflects that on 30 August 2007, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation, which indicates he was mentally responsible and had a normal thought content. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, 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 the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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 6 November 2020, and by a 5-0 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 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 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 re-entry code to 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 AR20200004281 1