1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 17 June 2019 b. Date Received: 1 July 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable and a separation code (SPD) change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he was discharged without treatment for his anxiety and depression, which he was diagnosed with in 2016. His diagnoses led to suicidal intentions and hospitalization. The applicant states it has all returned and is bothering him and causing him to act out of character. He also has heavy stress after finding out about his new baby. In a records review conducted on 30 July 2021, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI). 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), with a corresponding separation code of JKN, and the reentry code to RE-3. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision. (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: 13 August 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 June 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between on or about 4 December 2017 and on or about 3 January 2018, he wrongfully used marijuana. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 18 July 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 July 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 January 2017 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B1G 2B, Infantryman / 4 years / 5 months / 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, AGCM, NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NIF h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Memorandum dated 1 February 2018, reflects the applicant's lab confirmed positive urinalysis. Developmental Counseling Form dated 6 February 2018, for the urinalysis that was administered on 3 January 2018. FG Article 15, dated 19 March 2018, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 4 December 2017 and 3 January 2018). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4; forfeiture of $1245 pay (suspended); and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (suspended). Mental Status Evaluation, dated 20 April 2018, reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and appreciate the difference between right and wrong. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his active duty medical treatment records, which reflect the applicant was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, Medical Records, DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with application. 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. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states 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. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states 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. (4) 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. (5) Paragraph 14-3 prescribes a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record. (6) 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. 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 "JKK" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c (2), misconduct (drug abuse). f. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKK" will be assigned an RE Code of "4." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable and a separation code (SPD) change. The issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends he suffered from suicidal ideation, mixed anxiety, and depression. The applicant provided medical documents indicating he was diagnosed with suicidal ideation, mixed anxiety and depression. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 4 August 2017, which indicated the applicant was mentally responsible. He was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotional and conduct. 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 applicant was diagnosed in-service with Adjustment Disorder. While documentation outlines trauma symptoms, due to the applicant's avoidance of discussing the childhood events a related diagnosis could not be made; however, it is this advisor's opinion the applicant was struggling with trauma in-service. Post-service, the applicant is service connected for Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Similarly, to avoidance in-service, while the applicant wants to improve trauma symptoms, he is avoiding treatment hindering an appropriate diagnosis from being made. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. It is this opinion of the agency medical advisor, based on documentation available, that the applicant was experiencing trauma symptoms in-service. Providers were attempting to treat the trauma as it did underlie his difficulties. However, the applicant was avoidant as treatment initially caused an escalation in symptoms and distress. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. While typically GAD is not mitigating for drug use, documentation suggests the applicant was experiencing trauma symptoms in-service, related to childhood abuse, and discontinued treatment as a means of avoidance rather than resolution; addressing trauma initially increases distress. Based on liberal consideration, and this advisor's belief the applicant was and is continuing to struggle with trauma based symptoms, mitigation is recommended. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the applicant's drug use was a result of symptoms of an undiagnosed BH disorder. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the BH conditions outweighed the cause for separation. b. The applicant contends he suffered from suicidal ideation, mixed anxiety, and depression. The Board concurred with the Agency Medical Advisor and determined that relief was warranted. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI). d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to because Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the applicant's drug use was a result of symptoms of an undiagnosed BH disorder. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) under the same pretexts, thus the reason for discharge is no longer appropriate. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JKN. (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: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions)/JKN d. Change RE Code to: RE-3 e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a 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 AR20190008635 2