1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 March 2020 b. Date Received: 6 March 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was inequitable due to the fact it was one isolated incident which had no adverse action. The applicant's life and actions following the incident reflect that it was an isolated incident. At the near and far horizons, the applicant looks forward to moving on with the applicant's career and believes that an upgrade to the characterization of the military discharge will allow applicant to find solace and further advance in the pursuit of service to the community and country without hindrance, in recompense for all parties. The applicant has no criminal record before enlisting nor has applicant conducted self in any unlawful activity since departing from military service. Although the applicant has had setbacks in gaining meaningful employment, the applicant has secured employment in residential construction since 2016 in the community working as a framing carpenter for a local contractor. The applicant also recently entered an apprenticeship program offered by SMART Local 106 Union in San Francisco, CA and is currently employed as a Sheetmetal worker as of February 2019. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 5 April 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD outweighing the illegal drug use. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable, the narrative reason for separation to General Miscellaneous Reasons, with a corresponding separation code of JND. 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: Unacceptable Conduct / AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4-2B / JNC / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 14 June 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 15 March 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed to show cause for retention on active duty under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraphs 4-2b for misconduct and derogatory information filed in the Army Military Human Resource Record in accordance with AR 600-37, due to the applicant testing positive for the wrongful use of marijuana between on or about 5 September 2010 and on or about 5 October 2010 and on 16 December 2010 the applicant received a GOMOR on 16 December 2010. (3) Legal Consultation Date: 10 April 2011 (4) Board of Inquiry (BOI): NA (5) GOSCA Recommendation Date / Characterization: On 10 May 2011, the GOSCA recommended the applicant be separated from the U.S. Army / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (6) DASA Review Board Decision Date / Characterization: 24 May 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 8 May 2008 / 3 years b. Age at Appointment: / Education: 23 / Bachelor's Degree c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: 1LT / 11A 5R 2B Infantry / 3 years, 7 months, 30 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 15 October 2007 - 7 May 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (10 April 2009 - 5 December 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, CIB g. Performance Ratings: 14 April 2009 - 11 February 2010 / Best Qualified 1 September 2010 - 15 November 2010 / Do Not Promote h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: GO Article 15, dated 16 December 2010, reflects the applicant wrongfully used marijuana between on or about 5 September 2010 and on or about 5 October 2010. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $2074 pay per month for two months. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; two third-party letters; three Drug Detail Reports. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has secured employed in residential construction since 2016 in the community working as a framing carpenter for a local contractor. The applicant also entered an apprenticeship program offered by SMART Local 104 Union in San Francisco, CA and applicant is currently employed as a Sheetmetal worker as of February 2019. The applicant also volunteers as a staff member for a non-profit organization called Sonora Vets Helping Vets of Sonora, California. 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 600-8-24, Officer Transfers and Discharges, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers. (1) Paragraph 1-23 provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 1-23a, states an officer will normally receive an honorable characterization of service when the quality of the officer's service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty, or the final revocation of a security clearance under DODI 5200.02 and AR 380-67 for reasons that do not involve acts of misconduct for an officer. (3) Paragraph 1-23b, states an officer will normally receive a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service when the officer's military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A separation under general (under honorable conditions) normally appropriate when an officer: Submits an unqualified resignation; Separated based on misconduct; discharged for physical disability resulting from intentional misconduct or neglect; and, for final revocation of a security clearance. (4) Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty. (5) Paragraph 4-2b, prescribes for the elimination of an officer for misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or in the interests of national security. (6) Paragraph 4-20a (previously 4-24a), states an officer identified for elimination may, at any time during or prior to the final action in the elimination case elect one of the following options: (1) Submit a resignation in lieu of elimination; (2) request a discharge in lieu of elimination; and, (3) Apply for retirement in lieu of elimination if otherwise eligible. 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 "JNC" as the appropriate code to assign commissioned officers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 4-2b, unacceptable conduct. 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 Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant states the applicant is employed and recently entered an apprenticeship program. The applicant also volunteers as a staff member for a non-profit organization. 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. The applicant contends good service. The board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of the applicant service according to the DODI 1332.28. 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 diagnoses/experiences: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found VA service-connection for the applicant's PTSD establishes that it occurred 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. As there is an association between PTSD and use of illicit drugs to self-medicate, there is a nexus between the diagnosis of PTSD and the wrongful use of THC. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the applicant's PTSD outweighed the applicant's medically mitigated wrongful use of THC. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to PTSD mitigating the applicant's wrongful drug use. (2) The applicant contends good service and good post-service behavior and accomplishments. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's PTSD fully outweighing the applicant's drug abuse basis for separation. c. The Board determined that the discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD outweighing the illegal drug use. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable, the narrative reason for separation to General Miscellaneous Reasons, with a corresponding separation code of JND. 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 marijuana abuse. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to General Miscellaneous Reasons under the same pretexts, thus the reason for discharge is no longer appropriate. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JND. (3) The RE code will not change, as the mitigating condition is service-limiting. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: General Miscellaneous Reasons / JND 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 AR20200010133 1