1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 November 2019 b. Date Received: 19 November 2019 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, an upgrade of the discharge is for the purpose of receiving full VA School Benefits. The applicant, while serving on Active Duty, began having chronic sleepless nights, acute depression, and severe anxiety attacks. The applicant was young and did not know how to deal with this problem. The applicant sought help through behavioral health and began going to therapy on a semi regular basis. Just for that the applicant began to feel ostracized as the unit always had some slick remark to say about the applicant attending sessions. The applicant felt so alone and stressed out; it affected the applicant's day- to-day work, and it became difficult for the applicant to perform the assigned duties in a competent and efficient manner. The applicant became agitated with fellow co-workers and could not maintain a healthy relationship on the job. While processing out of the Army, the applicant submitted a claim to the VA for service connection and received an award rating of 70 percent for the condition. The applicant chose to use illegal drugs to deal with the stress instead of seeking professional help and for this. The applicant apologizes to the Army, the applicant's family, and the country. It was the applicant's desire to serve the country in an honorable manner, as is the tradition of the applicant's family. The applicant's reason for joining the Army was to serve the country and to qualify for the education benefits. It was the applicant's dream to attend a four-year college and obtain a four-year degree. The applicant received a general discharge under honorable conditions, which has prevented the applicant from getting the full VA school benefits. This is the applicant's primary reason for requesting a discharge upgrade to honorable. The applicant is asking the Board to show compassion and not give up on a life that wants to be a positive force for good. The applicant has learned a valuable lesson and wants to contribute to society and appeals to the Board's conscious to give the applicant a second chance at making it right. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 9 September 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (Chronic Adjustment Disorder (CAD) diagnoses) mitigating the drug use. 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: 2 June 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 April 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: having used marijuana between on or about 27 November 2015 and 1 December 2015. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 25 April 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 May 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 July 2012 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 117 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 68W10, Health Care Specialist / 3 years, 10 months, 2 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 10 December 2015, indicates the applicant tested positive for THC 17 during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing conducted on 1 December 2015. FG Article 15 dated 20 January 2016, for wrongfully using marijuana, a schedule II-controlled substance between on or about 27 November and 1 December 2015. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $1,027.00 pay, extra duty, and restriction for 30 days, and a written reprimand. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 February 2016, indicates the applicant had been diagnosed with an Axis I for Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Conduct (F43.24); Cannabis Use Disorder, Moderate (F12.20). The applicant was screened for substance use disorders. The interview and records review did not reveal any substance use beyond that known to command and ASAP. ASAP referral was not recommended at that time. It was also noted that at the time the applicant met DSM-5 criteria for Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Conduct and Cannabis Use Disorder, Moderate. These conditions were not medically boardable per AR 40-501. The applicant's behavior, specifically smoking marijuana leading to a positive UA, was likely not attributable to a behavioral health condition. The applicant was assessed at that time as not at elevated risk of harm to himself or others. From a behavioral health perspective, the applicant was able to participate in administrative proceedings. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Department of Veterans Affairs decision letter; progress notes from American Lake Addictive Treatment Center Psychologist; certificate for award of the Army Good Conduct Metal; and DD Form's 214 for the period of service under review. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has since attended an Addiction Treatment Clinic (ATC) at the VA, from 22 March 2018 to June 22 June 2018. This included individual therapy sessions and drug testing in which the applicant tested clean. 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) Paragraph 3-7c states 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. (5) 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. (6) 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. (7) 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. 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: 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. 8. SUMMARY 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. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's AMHRR indicates separation action was initiated against the applicant for testing positive for marijuana. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c (2), AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)," and the separation code is "JKK." The applicant seeks relief contending that while serving on Active Duty, the applicant began having chronic sleepless nights, acute depression, and severe anxiety attacks. The applicant was young and did not know how to deal with this problem. The applicant sought help through behavioral health and began going to therapy on a semi regular basis. Just for that the applicant began to feel ostracized as the unit always had some slick remark to say about the applicant attending sessions. The applicant felt so alone and stressed out; it affected the day-to-day work life on the job. It became difficult for the applicant to perform the assigned duties in a competent and efficient manner. The applicant became agitated with fellow co-workers and could not maintain a healthy relationship on the job. The applicant's contentions were noted; the Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 February 2016, indicates the applicant had been diagnosed with an Axis I for Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Conduct (F43.24); Cannabis Use Disorder, Moderate (F12.20). The applicant was screened for substance use disorders. The interview and records review did not reveal any substance use beyond that known to command and ASAP. ASAP referral was not recommended at that time. It was also noted that at the time the applicant met DSM-5 criteria for Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Conduct and Cannabis Use Disorder, Moderate. These conditions were not medically boardable per AR 40-501. The applicant's behavior, specifically smoking marijuana leading to a positive UA, was likely not attributable to a behavioral health condition. The applicant was assessed at that time as not having an elevated risk of harm to self or others. From a behavioral health perspective, the applicant was able to participate in administrative proceedings. The applicant contends that while processing out of the Army, submitted a claim to the VA for service connection and received an award rating of 70 percent for the condition. The applicant chose to use illegal drugs to deal with the stress instead of seeking professional help. 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 the applicant discharge processing. The applicant seeks relief contending an upgrade of the discharge is for the purpose of receiving full VA School Benefits. 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. 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 the following diagnoses or experiences which can, under certain circumstances, potentially mitigate or excuse misconduct leading to separation: Chronic Adjustment Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the VA has established that the applicant's diagnosis of Chronic Adjustment Disorder is related to military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant has a mitigating BH condition, Chronic Adjustment Disorder. As there is an association between Chronic Adjustment Disorder (CAD) and use of illicit drugs and alcohol to self-medicate painful emotions, there is a nexus between the applicant's diagnosis of CAD and the wrongful use of marijuana. (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. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the applicant's CAD outweighed the drug abuse basis for separation b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends being 70% service-connected for BH condition which was the reason the applicant self-medicated with illegal drugs. The ADRB is not bound by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decisions. There is no law or regulation which requires that an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the Board determination that there was a condition or experience that existed during the applicant's time in service. The Board must also articulate the nexus between that condition or experience and the basis for separation. Then, the Board must determine that the condition or experience outweighed the basis for separation. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former service member is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the ARBA when determining a member's discharge characterization. In this case, the Board determined that the applicant's CAD mitigated the applicant's drug use and relief was warranted. (2) The applicant seeks relief contending that while serving on Active Duty the applicant began having chronic sleepless nights, acute depression, and severe anxiety attacks. The applicant was young and did not know how to deal with these problems and did not receive the appropriate help the applicant believes was necessary. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's CAD fully outweighing the applicant's drug abuse basis for separation. (3) The applicant seeks relief contending that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of receiving full VA School Benefits. The Board determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do 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. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (Chronic Adjustment Disorder (CAD) diagnoses) mitigating the drug use. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's Chronic Adjustment Disorder mitigated the applicant's misconduct of marijuana abuse. 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 Board voted to change the RE code to RE-3. 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 AR20190014411 1