1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 February 2020 b. Date Received: 27 February 2020 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 general (under honorable conditions) or honorable conditions. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, suffered with PTSD from 1991 to 1999. The applicant was a medic in in the Battle of Median Ridge and the Battle of Al Busayyah, Iraq with no break for 100 hours. There were so many deaths seen that the applicant turned to alcohol and cocaine. The applicant's life was out of control with no sleep, long hours and too many battles. Now, the applicant is no longer on drugs and alcohol. The applicant is a changed person who now works a full-time job, attends church, and goes to counseling for help with PTSD. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 8 March 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD mitigated the applicant's cocaine abuse. 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. 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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 2 June 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 26 April 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for wrongfully using cocaine. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 April 2005 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 26 April 2005, the applicant voluntarily waived consideration of the discharge action before a separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 May 2005 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 July 2001 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 30 / HS Graduate / 124 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 91W2P, Health Care Specialist / 16 years, 3 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 6 February 1989 - 12 December 1995 / HD RA, 13 December 1995 - 26 May 1998 / HD RA, 27 May 1998 - 23 July 2001 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, Kosovo, Bosnia, SWA / Saudi Arabia (May 1991 - September 1991) See Note in Summary of Facts f. Awards and Decorations: MSM, ARCOM-4, AAM-8, GCM-3, NDSM-2, GWOTSM, NCOPDR-N2, ASR, CMB The applicant's AMHRR reflects award of the AFEM, VUA, SWABS-3, KOSCM-2, AFSM, SAKULIBM, KUKULIBM, NATOMDL-2, OSR-3, however, the awards are not reflected on the DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: May 2004 - October 2004 / Among the Best November 2004 - March 2005 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: One Developmental Counseling Form, dated 28 January 2005, for making a record of the applicant's self-referral and request for help after admitting unauthorized use of illegal substances. Electronic DD 2624, dated 4 February 2005, indicates the applicant tested positive for BZE 3770 during a unit urinalysis (PO) conducted on 28 January 2005. FG Article 15, dated 24 February 2005, for going from the appointed place of duty on or about 25 January 2005, with intent to deceive, make an official statement, to wit: "I was not using any drugs", or words to that effect, and was then known by the applicant to be so false on or about 27 January 2005; and between on or about 25 January 2005 and 28 January 2005, wrongfully use cocaine, a Schedule I controlled substance. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E- 5; forfeiture of $1225.00 pay per month for two months, restriction to the limits of the applicant residence (during non-duty hours), barracks, dining facility, place of duty, place of worship, medical and dental facilities for 45 days, and extra duty for 45 days. Report of Medical Examination, dated 31 March 2005, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section was enrolled in Narcotics Anonymous, ASAP, Tobacco Cessation programs. It was recommended the applicant continue all counseling programs for proper rehabilitation. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 18 April 2005, 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. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant asserted PTSD in self-authored statement. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; five third-party letters. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the 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), 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 600-85 defines the Limited Use Policy and states unless waived under the circumstances listed in paragraph 10-13d, Limited Use Policy prohibits the use by the government of protected evidence against a Soldier in actions under the UCMJ or on the issue of characterization of service in administrative proceedings. Additionally, the policy limits the characterization of discharge to "Honorable" if protected evidence is used. Protected evidence under this policy includes: Results of command-directed drug or alcohol testing that are inadmissible under the MRE; Results of a drug or alcohol test collected solely as part of a safety mishap investigation undertaken for accident analysis and the development of countermeasures; Information concerning drug or alcohol abuse or possession of drugs incidental to personal use, including the results of a drug or alcohol test, collected as a result of a Soldier's emergency medical care solely for an actual or possible alcohol or other drug overdose; A Soldier's self-referral to BH for SUD treatment; Admissions and other information concerning alcohol or other drug abuse or possession of drugs incidental to personal use occurring prior to the date of initial referral to treatment and provided by Soldiers as part of their initial entry into SUD treatment; Drug or alcohol test results, if the Soldier voluntarily submits to a DoD or Army SUD treatment before the Soldier has received an order to submit for a lawful drug or alcohol test; and, the results of a drug or alcohol test administered solely as a required part of a DoD or Army SUD treatment program. e. 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 3-8a states A Soldier is entitled to an honorable characterization of service if limited-use evidence (see AR 600-85) is initially introduced by the Government in the discharge proceedings, and the discharge is based upon those proceedings. The separation authority will consult with the servicing Judge Advocate in cases involving limited use evidence. (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. f. 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, misconduct (drug abuse). g. 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 or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends, in effect, suffered with PTSD while serving in the military due to all the deployments and battles and turned to alcohol and cocaine. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any documentation that shows a PTSD diagnosis; however, it does contain a Report of Medical Examination, dated 31 March 2005 which shows the applicant was in counseling for ASAP, Narcotics Anonymous and Tobacco Cessation. The record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 18 April 2005, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and was able to recognize right from wrong. The applicant contends, in effect, has obtained employment and no longer on drugs and alcohol. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. No law or regulation provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life after leaving the service. 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. Note: The applicants DD Form 214 does not show evidence the applicant served overseas, yet the ERB reflects overseas service and there are awards for the overseas service. 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. 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 diagnoses/experiences: PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found VA establishment of service connection indicates that the applicant's PTSD began during 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, PTSD related to combat. As there is an association between PTSD and use of illicit drugs to self-medicate painful emotional symptoms, there is a nexus between the applicant's diagnosis of PTSD and wrongful use of cocaine. (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 PTSD outweighed the drug abuse basis for separation for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends suffering with PTSD while serving in the military due to all of the deployments and battles and turned to alcohol and cocaine. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to PTSD mitigating the applicant's cocaine abuse charge. (2) The applicant contends obtained employment, no longer on drugs or alcohol, and attends church and PTSD counseling. 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 PTSD outweighing the applicant's drug abuse basis for separation c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD mitigated the applicant's cocaine abuse. 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. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD mitigated the applicant's misconduct of cocaine 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 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: No Change 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 AR20200004974 1