1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 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 honorable. The applicant requests a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, receiving disability compensation for multiple disabilities, including anxiety disorder, which is associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). On 3 September 2014, the Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum to Board for Correction of Military / Naval Records (BCM/NR) to carefully consider petitions from veterans claiming PTSD or related conditions the veterans believed mitigated the misconduct, which led to the discharge. The discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident in 18 months of service without any other adverse actions. The applicant, working in the Personnel Office and processing personnel actions, had witnessed several other Soldiers who had committed the same offense more than once and were not eliminated from the Army. The applicant further details the contentions in two self-authored statements submitted with the application. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 17 August 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Adjustment Disorder and Anxiety Disorder mitigating to basis of seperation. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of a change 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, Paragraph 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 6 September 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 20 July 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant wrongfully used marijuana and failed to report to the appointed place of duty on multiple occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) / The intermediate commander recommended the applicant be retained. (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 21 July 2011, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 August 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 June 2007 / 4 years, 21 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / Master's Degree / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 42A20, Human Resources Specialist / 4 years, 2 months, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (12 October 2009 - 19 June 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: 1 March 2010 - 28 February 2011 / Fully Capable 1 March 2011 - 7 June 2011 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, 26 April 2011, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 21 (marijuana), during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 8 April 2011. Field Grade Article 15, 7 June 2011, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 10 March and 8 April 2011). The DA Form 2627 is missing the page which would, if available, include the punishment imposed. The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), 6 September 2011, reflects the applicant was flagged for Involuntary Separation or Discharge (Field Initiated) (BA), effective 17 May 2011, and was ineligible for reenlistment because of Pending Separation (9V). The applicant was reduced from E-5 to E-4 effective 8 June 2011. Four Developmental Counseling Forms, for positive urinalysis test for THC and failure to be at the appointed place of duty on multiple occasions. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) letter, 3 August 2012, reflecting the VA granted the applicant 30 percent disability for anxiety disorder not otherwise specified (NOS) (claimed as adjustment disorder with anxiety and insomnia), with a combined rating of 70 percent. (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, 11 May 2018 [sic], reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings; could appreciate the difference between right and wrong; and met medical retention requirements. The applicant had been screened for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) with negative results. The conditions were either not present or did not meet AR 40-501 criteria for a medical evaluation board. The command was advised to consider the influence of these conditions. The applicant was diagnosed with: Anxiety Disorder, NOS. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; two DD Forms 293; two self-authored statements; three award certificates; promotion certificate; VA letter, with supporting documents; VA Rating Decision; and two third party statements. 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 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) 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. (4) 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. (5) 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, 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 a narrative reason change. The applicant's Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200 with a honorable discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)," and the separation code is "JKK." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214, and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635- 5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends being diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, NOS, which is associated with PTSD, by the VA and granted disability and the condition affected the applicant's behavior which led to the discharge. The applicant provided medical documents indicating the VA granted the applicant 30 percent disability for anxiety disorder (NOS) (claimed as adjustment disorder with anxiety and insomnia), with a combined rating of 70 percent. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention the applicant's anxiety disorder was associated with PTSD. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 11 May 2011, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and recognized right from wrong. The applicant was diagnosed with anxiety disorder, NOS. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-5, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends the command did not assist the applicant with the mental issues. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends other Soldiers with similar offenses were allowed to stay in the Army. The DODI 1332.28 provides each case must be decided on its individual merits, and a case-by- case basis, considering the unique facts and circumstances of the case. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. They all recognize the applicant's good military 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. 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: Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder NOS, PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder and Anxiety Disorder NOS. The applicant is also diagnosed and service connected by the VA for combat-related PTSD. Service connection establishes that applicant's PTSD existed 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 was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder and Anxiety Disorder NOS. The applicant is also diagnosed and service connected by the VA for combat-related PTSD. Given the nexus between PTSD, avoidance, and self-medicating with substances, applicant's PTSD likely contributed to the FTRs and wrongful use of marijuana that led to his separation. (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 condition or experience outweighed the listed basis for separation for the aforementioned reason(s). b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The Board considered this contention and voted to grant relief and change the narrative reason to minor misconduct. (2) The applicant contends being diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, NOS, which is associated with PTSD, by the VA and granted disability and the condition affected the applicant's behavior which led to the discharge. The Board determined this contention was valid due to an inequitable discharge given medical mitigation and voted to upgrade the narrative reason to minor misconduct. (3) The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. The Board considered this contention and found the discharge inequitable given medical mitigation and voted to upgrade the narrative reason to minor misconduct. (4) The applicant contends the command did not assist the applicant with the mental issues. The applicant contends other Soldiers with similar offenses were allowed to stay in the Army. 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, the Board considered this contention but did not find any evidence to support. (5) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings along with the totality of the applicant's service record. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Adjustment Disorder and Anxiety Disorder. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of a change 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. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board determined the discharge is proper and equitable as a prior ADRB has upgraded the discharge with a Character of Honorable therefore, is no further relief available. (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 a RE-3, which is a waivable code. An RE Code of "3" indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army's needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes, if appropriate. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20210001650 1