1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 January 2021 b. Date Received: 13 January 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant's Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is Under Other than Honorable Conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to Honorable. b. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, they were struggling with undiagnosed posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after returning from Iraq. They have since been diagnosed and currently in treatment for their PTSD. The applicant has since held a job and become a better member of society. They still struggle daily with nightmares and flashbacks, however, no longer do they self-medicate; instead, they rely on professional help. c. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 6 December 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable, Therefore, the Board granted relief in the form of an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to General. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code, and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 10 April 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for voluntary discharge under provision of AR635-200, Chapter 10, In Lieu of Trial by Court-Marital. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other than Honorable Conditions ( (4) Legal Consultation Date: 31 March 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 April 2008 / Under Other than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 May 2005 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / High School Graduate / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 63B10 H8 Wheeled Vehicle Mech / 2 years, 10 months and 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: NIF e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (16 October 2006 - 14 December 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR, CAB, DMB- MECH g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) On 15 November 2007, the applicant completed their first reenlistment in the Regular Army for 6 years as a SPC. (2) The Enlisted Record Brief provides the applicant promoted to SPC on 4 May 2007; they were awarded an Iraq Campaign Medal and Overseas Service Medal; on 29 January 2007, and they were flagged, Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG) for adverse action (AA). (3) On 9 January and 7 March 2008, the ASAP Officer, Fort Carson, Colorado, provides notification to the command of the positive test results for wrongful use of cocaine on 21 December 2007 and marijuana/cocaine on 12 February 2008, advising to initiate mandatory actions IAW AR 600-85, which requires immediately reporting the positive result to Criminal Investigation Division (CID), initiate a Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG), refer the Soldier to ASAP Clinic for evaluation within 3 working days of receipt of positive results, and initiate separation action. (4) Four Personnel Action documents provide the following: Date Duty Status From Duty Status To 14 March 2008 Present for Duty (PDY) Failed to Report (FTR) 17 March 2008 FTR Absent Without Leave (AWOL) 26 March 2008 PDY AWOL 26 March 2008 AWOL PDY (5) Five Sworn Statements provides the following: (a) 1SG provides on 17 March 2008, the applicant showed up to their office at 1530, after being unaccounted for since 13 March 2008. While they were talking with the applicant, 1SG noticed their pupils were extremely small and bloodshot. 1SG asked them if they were currently on drugs and the applicant admitted they were on cocaine and marijuana; 1SG notified CPT. (b) The same day MSG provides the applicant showed up in their office after being AWOL for days. The applicant could not stand still and was shaking. MSG asked them to stand still, and the applicant replied that they could not because they were high on cocaine and marijuana. At that time CPT ordered them to go to Pikes Peak Mental Health facility. (c) On 25 March 2008, SGT went to talk with the applicant at Pikes Peak Mental Health facility. SGT was escorted to the interview room and after a five-minute wait, the attendant returned and informed them the applicant was missing. The attendant escorted them out of the building. SGT went around the building to see if the applicant was around the vicinity of the building, and they were nowhere around. * The applicant texted SGT at 1152: "So what is this cost?" * SGT [called] texted: "For what?" * The applicant texted at 1203: "This s__t." * SGT texted at 1216: "Why did you leave Lighthouse?" * The applicant texted: "So what should I expect when I go to work tomorrow, any idea?" * SGT texted at 1218: "You are going to jail dude." * The applicant texted at: "I know why you think I did what I did." * SGT texted: "Please enlighten me." * On 26 March 2008, SGT was told the applicant was coming on post to turn themselves in; they waited, left to an appointment, and returned; they applicant showed up at 1530. (d) On 27 March 2008, SPC stated while they were deployed to Iraq together; SPC was sent to a Connex to grab a part and opened up the door and saw the applicant doing drugs. When SPC confronted them about it, they said they had received the drugs in the mail. SPC informed SGT about the encounter. A PVT stated the applicant told SGT that they had a shotgun in their truck. Also, the applicant has a history of drug abuse. On the same day, the company commander recommended continued pre-trial confinement to the Military Magistrate, Office of the Staff Judge Advocate. The Soldier has been ordered into pretrial confinement in violation of Article 86, UCMJ (AWOL); Article 92, UCMJ (communicating a threat); three specifications of Article 112a, UCMJ (cocaine; cocaine/marijuana; possession); Article 134, UCMJ (breaking restriction). Below is the timeline of events outlining the applicant's misconduct and the command's attempt to prevent them from continuing to engage in further misconduct: * September 2006: Received a Summary Court-Martial for positive UA * 21 December 2008: Positive UA for cocaine and marijuana * 10 February 2008: ASAP Failure * 12 February 2008: Positive UA for cocaine * 5 March 2008: Commander's restriction emplaced * 6 March 2008: First reading for Field Grade (FG) Article 15 for positive UA * 7 March 2008: Violated restriction; FTR; squad leader finds them "passed out" in their barracks room * 14 March 2008: Violated restriction; Status changed to FTR * 17 March 2008: Status changed to AWOL (AM); Returned to unit while under the influence of illegal drugs, admitted to cocaine and marijuana use; referred to Pikes Peak Mental Health Facility for detox * 25 March 2008: Called the command at 0800; command informed the applicant they would be punished; Left rehab by jumping eighteen-foot wall at 1015 * 26 March 2008: Status changed to AWOL (AM); Returned to unit (PM) and admits to illegal drugs * 27 March 2008: Violated order from CDR and 1SG to submit to urinalysis at 0800; Operates POV while under the influence of illegal drugs; Tells supervisor they have a gun in their POV; Goes into parking lot and gets into their truck; After they would not get out, the unit notified the Military Police (MPs); MPs found an unregistered shotgun and ammo in their vehicle (e) Based on the seriousness of the applicant's misconduct and the blatant disregard for the laws and moral conduct expected of any Soldier are apparent as they have failed to obey them on numerous occasions; less severe forms of restrain are inadequate. The applicant was placed into pretrial confinement. (6) On 31 March 2008, after consulting with counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, Discharge In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. In their request, they affirmed no one had subjected them to coercion, and counsel had advised them of the implications of their request. The applicant further acknowledged they were guilty of the charges against them or lesser ones electing not to submit a statement on their behalf. The defense counsel endorsed the applicant's voluntary request for discharge acknowledging they were counseled on the possible effects of an Under Other than Honorable Conditions discharge. The same day, the chain of command recommended their approval with a characterization of service as Under Other than Honorable Conditions. (7) On 2 April 2008, the appropriate approval authority approved the separation and directed their discharge with a characterization of service of Under Other than Honorable Conditions and a reduction to the lowest enlisted rank; as a result, the applicant was released from pretrial confinement. (8) A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) reflects the applicant was discharge accordingly on 10 April 2008, with 2 years, 10 months, and 27 days; they have not completed their first full term of service. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 10 days * AWOL for 3 days, (14 - 17 March 2008), Returned to Military Control * Pretrial Confinement (PTC) for 7 days, (27 March - 2 April 2008), Released j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: On 29 October 2020, a letter from the Staff Psychiatrist at Andrews Center Behavioral Healthcare System, Athens, TX, provides the applicant has PTSD and their experience while deployed to a combat theater in Iraq with the Army 2nd Infantry Division from April 2006 to December 2007 is the most likely cause for their PTSD problems. (a) Upon their return to Fort Carson, Colorado in December 2007, they developed a problem with cocaine use, which eventually resulted in an Other than Honorable discharge after they went AWOL. While this letter is not meant to excuse the cocaine use or the related disciplinary problems, the evidence suggests that their untreated PTSD was likely a contributing factor. Cocaine use is not known to be a causal factor for PTSD; however, cocaine use was at least in part a maladaptive reaction to the PTSD problems they were having at the time. (b) The applicant no longer uses cocaine and is gainfully employed as a commercial truck driver. They sought mental health services due to their PTSD and related mood problems were jeopardizing their marriage and family; they have responded well to treatment to date. They are seeking a discharge update. (2) AMHRR Listed: Although the AMHRR is void of medical records in reference to their rehabilitation period, the commander's report for pretrial confinement provides the applicant was in rehabilitation in Pikes Peak Behavioral Health facility from 17 - 25 March 2008 for illegal drug use, before leaving the facility. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge); Diagnosis Letter from Andrews Center Behavioral Healthcare System. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is under a doctor's care successfully treating their PTSD and they are gainfully employed as a commercial truck driver. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides 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), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides 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, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities' last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification 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. (2) 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. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board), dated 25 September 2019, sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember's date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10 United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (1) An Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier'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. (2) A General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (3) An Under other-than-honorable-conditions discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable and it may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial based on certain circumstances or patterns of behavior or acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. (4) Chapter 10, Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court Martial is applicable to members who had committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service. The request could be submitted at any time after the charges had been preferred. Although an honorable or general was authorized, an under other than honorable conditions discharge was considered appropriate, unless the record was so meritorious it would warrant an honorable. (a) After receiving legal counseling, the soldier may elect to submit a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. The soldier will sign a written request, certifying that they have been counseled, understands their rights, and may receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions. (b) The following will accompany the request for discharge: * A copy of the court-martial Charge Sheet (DD Form 458) * Report of medical examination and mental status evaluation, if conducted * A complete copy of all reports of investigation * Any statement, documents, or other matter considered by the commanding officer in making their recommendation, including any information presented for consideration by the soldier or consulting counsel * A statement of any reasonable ground for belief that the soldier is, or was at the time of misconduct, mentally defective, deranged, or abnormal. When appropriate, evaluation by a psychiatrist will be included. (5) Chapter 15 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army's best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary's approved designee as announced in updated memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. e. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. f. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army, and Reserve Components Enlistment Program, governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: (1) RE-1 Applies to: Person completing his or her term of active service who is considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army. Eligibility: Qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met. (2) RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waiverable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. (3) RE-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. g. Army Regulation 630-10 (Absence, Without Leave, Desertion, and Administration of Personnel Involved in Civilian Court Proceedings) provides policies and procedures for reporting unauthorized absentees and deserters, the administering of absent without leave (AWOL) personnel and deserters, returning absentees and deserters to military control and the surrendering of military personnel to civilian law enforcement authorities. When a soldier returns from an absence that is or appears to be unauthorized, the unit commander informally investigates whether disciplinary action should be taken and if the soldier be charged with time lost. (1) Classification of an absence is dependent upon such factors as the following: * Order and instructions, written/oral, the Soldier received before/during absence * Age, military experience, and general intelligence of the Soldier * Number and type of contact the Soldier had with the military absent * Complete or incomplete results of a court-martial decision if any (2) An absence immediately following authorized leave is classified as AWOL. Should the absence subsequently be reclassified, the soldiers leave is corrected to reflect the reclassified absence, except if the absence is caused by the following: * Mental incapacity * Detention by civilian authorities * Early departure of a mobile unit due to operational commitments h. Manual for Courts-Martial (2008 Edition), United States, states military law consists of the statutes governing the military establishment and regulations issued thereunder, the constitutional powers of the President and regulations issued thereunder, and the inherent authority of military commanders. Military law includes jurisdiction exercised by courts-martial and the jurisdiction exercised by commanders with respect to nonjudicial punishment. The purpose of military law is to promote justice, to assist in maintaining good orders and discipline in the Armed Forces. (1) Article 86 (absence without leave) states in subparagraph being absence without leave for more than 3 days, not more than 30 days, the maximum punishment consists of a forfeiture of two-thirds pay and allowances for 6 months, and confinement for 6 months. (2) Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation) states in subparagraph the maximum punishment consists of dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 2 years. (3) Article 112a (wrongful use of less than 30 grams) states in subparagraph the maximum punishment consists of dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and confinement for 2 years. (4) Article 134 (wrongfully communicating a threat) states in subparagraph the maximum punishment consists of dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 3 years. i. Army Regulation 600-85 (Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP)) dated 28 December 2012, provided a comprehensive alcohol and drug abuse prevention and control policies, procedures, and responsibilities for Soldiers for ASAP services. The ASAP is a command program that emphasizes readiness and personal responsibility. The ultimate decision regarding separation or retention of abusers is the responsibility of the Soldier's chain of command. Abuse of alcohol or the use of illicit drugs by military personnel is inconsistent with Army values and the standards of performance, discipline, and readiness necessary to accomplish the Army's mission. (1) Unit commanders must intervene early and refer all Soldiers suspected or identified as alcohol and/or drug abusers to the ASAP. The unit commander should recommend enrollment based on the Soldier's potential for continued military service in terms of professional skills, behavior, and potential for advancement. (2) ASAP participation is mandatory for all Soldiers who are command referred. Failure to attend a mandatory counseling session may constitute a violation of Article 86 (Absence Without Leave) of the UCMJ. (3) Alcohol and/or other drug abusers, and in some cases dependent alcohol users, may be enrolled in the ASAP when such enrollment is clinically recommended. Soldiers who fail to participate adequately in, or to respond successfully to, rehabilitation will be processed for administrative separation and not be provided another opportunity for rehabilitation except under the most extraordinary circumstances, as determined by the Clinical Director in consultation with the unit commander. (4) All Soldiers who are identified as drug abusers, without exception, will be referred to the ASAP counseling center for screening; be considered for disciplinary action under the UCMJ, as appropriate; and be processed for administrative separation in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. a. The applicant requests Honorable. A review of the record provides there was administratively irregularity in the proper retention of official military records, specifically, a two- part mandatory clinical assessment, required within 4 days of the first positive urinalysis, their rehabilitation medical documents and/or a letter from the ASAP counselor for their rehabilitation failure. b. A review of the available evidence provides the applicant completed their first reenlistment in the Regular Army as a SPC. They deployed to combat in Iraq for 20 months and was awarded an Army Commendation Medal and an Iraq Campaign Medal. (1) The applicant tested positive for cocaine in December 2007; February 2008 they tested positive for cocaine/marijuana and was deemed an ASAP failure. The applicant was placed on Commander's Restriction and went AWOL from 14 - 17 March 2008. Upon their return to military control, the command noticed the applicant was high and when confronted, they admitted to being high on cocaine and marijuana. The applicant was escorted to the rehabilitation facility, Pikes Peak Mental Health, where they remained until they jumped an eighteen-foot wall to escape on 25 March 2008. The applicant went AWOL and returned on 26 March 2008. Upon their return, they were charged with having been AWOL, breaking restriction, and three specifications of wrongful use of cocaine and possession, and with communicating a threat; as a result, they were placed in pretrial confinement from 27 March - 2 April 2023 to await court-martial. (2) After consulting with counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested to be discharged in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial and elected not to submit a statement on their behalf. In doing so, they would have waived the opportunity to appear before a court-martial and risk a felony conviction. Once their separation was approved, they were released from pretrial confinement. They received a characterization of service of Under Other than Honorable Conditions. (3) A medical and mental examination was not required for the voluntary discharge ILO trial by court-martial but could have bene requested by the service member. (4) The applicant completed 2 years, 10 months, and 27 days of their 6-year contractual obligation prior to the misconduct that led to their discharge. c. Army Regulation 635-200 states Chapter 10 is a voluntary discharge request in-lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions normally is appropriate for a soldier who is discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record during the current enlistment. For Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper. d. Published Department of Defense guidance indicates that the guidance is not intended to interfere or impede on the Board's statutory independence. The Board will determine the relative weight of the action that led to the discharge and whether it supports relief or not. In reaching its determination, the Board shall consider the applicant's petition, available records and/or submitted documents in support of the petition. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has the following potentially-mitigating diagnosis: applicant holds a post- service PTSD diagnosis secondary to combat. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The combat serving as the basis for the post-service PTSD diagnosis. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partial. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that given the nexus between trauma, substance use and avoidance, the majority of the misconduct is mitigated; having an unregistered shotgun and ammo in vehicle is not mitigated. Given the totality of the mitigated misconduct, an upgrade is recommended. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the post-service PTSD diagnosis did not outweigh the basis of separation. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, they were struggling with undiagnosed Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after returning from Iraq. They have since been diagnosed and currently in treatment for their PTSD. The applicant has since held a job and become a better member of society. They still struggle daily with nightmares and flashbacks, however, no longer do they self-medicate; instead, they rely on professional help. The Board considered this contention but found an upgrade to Honorable not supported by the evidence of record. The Honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of exceptional conduct and performance of duty or is otherwise meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. The Board found that the applicant's service, given the nature of the misconduct, was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (2) A letter from the Staff Psychiatrist at Andrews Center Behavioral Healthcare System, Athens, TX, provides the applicant has PTSD and their experience while deployed to a combat theater in Iraq with the Army 2nd Infantry Division from April 2006 to December 2007 is the most likely cause for their PTSD problems. The Board considered this contention and acknowledged the post-service diagnosis. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on quality and combat service; therefore, the Board granted relief in the form of an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to General. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code, and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. The applicant has exhausted their appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant's contentions that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board considered the applicant's statement, record of service, the frequency and nature of misconduct, and the reason for separation. The Board found sufficient evidence of an in-service mitigating factors (Quality, Combat) and concurred with the conclusion of the medical advising official that the applicant's PTSD does mitigate the applicant's misconduct (wrongful use of cocaine and marijuana; FTRs; AWOLs; failure to obey a lawful order or regulation; violation of restriction; operating a motor vehicle under the influence of illegal drugs). Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the character of service the applicant received upon separation was inequitable. The Board determine that an upgrade did not rise to level of honorable due to the seriousness of the unmitigated misconduct (unregistered firearm and ammunition, communicating a threat). (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge BH - Behavioral Health CG - Company Grade Article 15 CID - Criminal Investigation Division ELS - Entry Level Status FG - Field Grade Article 15 GD - General Discharge HS - High School HD - Honorable Discharge IADT - Initial Active Duty Training MP - Military Police MST - Military Sexual Trauma N/A - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) - Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Re-entry SCM - Summary Court Martial SPCM - Special Court Martial SPD - Separation Program Designator TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA - Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210005670 1