1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 30 October 2020 b. Date Received: 31 October 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 honorable conditions (general). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable and a narrative reason change. b. The applicant states, in effect that they were dealing with a mental health disorder that progressively worsen during their time in the army. Anxiety and depression caused them to abuse alcohol and smoke marijuana because it relieved their stress during the times that they were away from their family and child. During that time, they believed it was weak to seek help for the issues they were having, and now that they are seeking help, they have learned better ways to manage their stress and they no longer rely on alcohol and drugs. They were an excellent soldier; their work ethic spoke for itself. c. They acknowledge what they did wrong to be administratively discharged. They failed a urine analysis because they smoked marijuana. They were having a tough time away from their child and developed anxiety and depression. They attempted to enroll in a married army couples’ program (MACP) but it was not going to be effective for another 2 years, they tried to remain hopeful but things started to get hard as the days passed. They tried mediating and speaking to others, but it was not enough to fill the void. They contend everything they tried failed; they were consumed with anger and sorrow. (1) Their issues did not affect their work performance, they excelled at their MOS and maxed out their PT tests. After graduating from BLC they started smoking and failed the urine analysis two days before they were scheduled to be promoted to sergeant. They had failed their self, their family and fellow comrades. They were at their lowest and they wanted to die because they failed everyone and all that they worked for went to dust. The applicant states even though they harbored those feelings they did not let it affect the mission. (2) After being discharged, they were reunited with their family but was still suffering from anxiety and depression. They were emotionally immature during their time in service and does not believe in second chances but does believe in new beginnings. They have shown exemplary service from the beginning of their career to the end, they acknowledge their mistakes and is asking for an upgrade so that they can begin a new chapter in their life. d. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 4 October 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Drug Abuse) / AR 635- 200 / JKK / RE-4 / Under Honorable Conditions (General) b. Date of Discharge: 26 March 2020 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: Misconduct, Abuse of illegal drugs. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 February 2020 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 17 August 2015 / 5 years, 35 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / HS / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25B10 IT Specialist / 4 years, 7 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, South Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-3, AGCM, NDSM, GWTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-2, COA-2 g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) An Enlistment/ Reenlistment Document provides that the applicant enlisted in the United States Army at the rank of private (E-1) for a period of 8 years on 17 March 2015 (2) A Certificate of Achievement was awarded to the applicant on 26 February 2016 for their outstanding support and selfless service for the United States Army Garrison Humphreys and 304th Expeditionary Signal Battalion. A Certificate of Achievement was awarded for their steadfast support, loyalty, and dedication to 411th Medical Command Hospital. (3) A Department of The Army, The Army Achievement Medal provides that the applicant received this medal for their exceptional meritorious service from 15 April 2016 to 07 April 2017 while stationed in South Korea. The Army Achievement Medal dated 14 May 2018, provides the applicant received this medal for meritorious achievement while stationed in Germany. (4) A Recommendation for Award document provides that on 25 February 2019 the applicant was recommended to receive the Army Achievement Medal for their service between 08 April 2017 to 07 April 2019. Four achievements listed: * “Established themselves as a highly motivated and versatile soldier” ... Their “dedication enabled the team to deploy on multiple missions across the European Theater” * Their “technical proficiency and commitment to mission success were critical” in providing services. * “Demonstrated the ability to perform under stress and the dedication to hold their self to the highest standard” * “Consistently scored above 280 points on all their army physical fitness tests, demonstrated a high level of athleticism for other soldiers to emulate” Their “selfless-service helped assist other team leaders in developing an interactive plan to improve the overall scores by 30 points for the platoon”. Their “astounding motivation encouraged the team to push themselves which raised the teams average APFT score...” (5) A Department of The Army, The Army Good Conduct Medal provides that the applicant received this medal for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active federal military service from 17 August 2015 to 16 August 2018. (6) A memorandum, Department of The Army, 11th Theater Tactical Signal Brigade, Fort Hood, Texas, subject: Separation under AR 635-200, Ch 14-12c(2), Misconduct-Abuse of illegal drugs, provides the applicant was directed to be separated from the army with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service on 27 February 2020. (7) An Enlisted Record Brief dated 27 March 2020 provides the applicant was married to another service member with one dependent child. * Flagged with two codes; U and B; effective 19 December 2019 * Graduated Basic Leader Course (BLC) in 2019 * Suspension of a favorable personnel action i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: N/A j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): Anxiety and depression (1) Applicant provided: One consult request document, a psychology appointment confirmation sheet from the VA, and 4 pages of progress notes that provides the applicant was diagnosed with chronic adjustment disorder with depression/anxiety, social anxiety disorder, and panic disorder. They screened positive on the adult ADHD self-report. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: 2 - DD Form 293 (Discharge Review) applications, a self- authored letter, copy of their DD Form 214, copy of their ERB, The Good Conduct Medal, a Recommendation for Award document, 2- The Army Achievement Medals, 2- certificates of achievement and 10 additional enclosures in support of their application. * An appointment confirmation document that provides they were scheduled for a VA psychology appointment * A copy of their physical standard score card that provides they scored a 300 * A character letter from their last NCOIC, that describes the applicant as a “leader, hard worker and innovator.” “We were all shocked when he got in trouble…” “he was so well tempered and composed but he had told me being away from his family was getting to him” “I helped him get in the Married Army Couples program but was not able to get reassigned until the following year” “…his work ethic never changed, he was the perfect soldier in book” * A character letter from a soldier that served with the applicant, “he kept it professional, and his work ethic was still better than mine, even though he did mess up, he never let it affect his work ethic or motivation” “…. He was an honorable soldier” * A copy of their CompTIA Security certification * A consult request document that provides they are 60 percent service connected (VA Benefits) * Four progress psychiatry notes, that provides they were diagnosed with “Chronic Adjustment Disorder with depression/anxiety r/o GAD social anxiety disorder vs panic disorder” 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: They started receiving help for their mental health issues and currently works as a Cybersecurity Engineer for the U.S. Coast Guard. 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 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 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. 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. A soldier subject to this discharge under this regulation will be considered and processed for discharge even though he/she has filed an appeal or has stated his/her intention to do so. Paragraph 14-12c, states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. (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 600-85 (Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP)) governs the program and identifies Army policy on alcohol and other drug abuse, and responsibilities. The ASAP is a command program that emphasizes readiness and personal responsibility. It provides 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 missions. Individuals who do not self-refer for treatment and are subsequently identified as positive for controlled substances for which they do not have a valid prescription may be considered in violation of the UCMJ for drug misuse/abuse. f. Army Regulation 600-8-2 (Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions (Flag)) provides the policies, operating rules and steps governing the suspension of favorable personnel actions. A flag is emplaced during some type of disciplinary or administrative action until that action is concluded. The Flag should be initiated within 3 working days after identification of the soldiers’ unfavorable status and removed within 3 working days after determination of the final disposition. Commanders and general office staff will establish necessary internal controls to ensure requirements are met: DA Form 268 is prepared to reflect that favorable personnel actions are suspended; the Flag is input into HR systems without delay. * Flag code “U” is to be used for drug abuse averse actions. Flags are initiated for positive drug tests; the effective date of the Flag is the date of the offense. * Flag code “B” is a nontransferable code used when involuntary separation or discharge is initiated (field) g. 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, misconduct (drug abuse). h. 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. 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 an upgrade to honorable. The applicant’s DD-214 provides that the applicant received a General (under honorable conditions) characterization of service, rather than an under other than honorable conditions (UOTCH) discharge, which is normally considered appropriate for a soldier discharged under CH 14 for misconduct. b. A review of the AMHRR provides administrative irregularity occurred in the proper retention of required records; specifically, the record is void of a separation notification, service member acknowledgement, election of rights, commander and chain of command recommendation, and a medical and mental health status examination. Due to the lack of evidence, we are unable to provide the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the events that took place that led to the applicant being discharged. c. The available evidence does provide the applicant was flagged for adverse action – drug abuse and for involuntary separation on 19 December 2019. d. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for members being separated for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and convictions by civil authorities. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. 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. e. 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, which were void of an in-service diagnosis or service connected condition; VA treatment diagnosis are not applied as they are not service connected. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant marked OBH, asserting anxiety and depressive symptoms in-service. While he holds a post-service diagnosis, it is not service connected for consideration. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant’s anxiety symptoms did not rise to a diagnostic level in-service. Moreover, the applicant’s statements reflect a purposeful choice to use and continue using with the goal of discharge further supporting intact cognitive functioning. Additionally, although the applicant has a treatment diagnosis at the VA, he has not been found to have a service-related condition for application. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant’s anxiety symptoms outweighed the basis for applicant’s separation – drug abuse – for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant did not make any contentions or provide any evidence to support that the discharge was improper or inequitable. The Board reviewed all available evidence and determined that no relief was warranted at this time. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, considering the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant’s contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant’s anxiety and depressive symptoms did not excuse or mitigate the offenses of drug abuse. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. Therefore, the applicant’s General discharge was proper and equitable as the applicant’s misconduct fell below that level of meritorious service warranted for an upgrade to Honorable discharge. (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 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20200010219 1