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 an upgrade honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, ingesting their spouses' medication for ADHD. The applicant contends being under the direction of a mental health doctor at the time and tested positive on a UA. Due to it not being documented in the applicant's medical records. The applicant contends being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and attaining employment has been hard to cope. The applicant states having served over five years and believes the discharge should be upgraded to honorable. Having been served an Article 15, reduced and now coping with it a year after being discharged is punishment. The applicant would be relieved if the discharge was changed to honorable so the applicant can seek employment to provide a suitable income to support the family. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 20 June 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board, based on the applicant's PTSD and ADHD outweighing the basis for separation - wrongful use of Adderall - determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation, as well as the RE code, is now inequitable. Therefore, the Board directed the issue of a new DD Form 214 changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN, with a corresponding RE code of RE-3. The Board determined the characterization of service was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 7 July 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 April 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant wrongfully used Adderall, a Schedule II controlled substance, between on or about 28 July 2013, and on or about 28 August 2013. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 16 April 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 14 May 2014, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of rights. On 30 May 2014, the administrative separation board convened, and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant's discharge with characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). On 30 May 2014, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 3 June 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 October 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / GED / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 92Y20, Unit Supply Specialist / 15 years, 3 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 26 March 1999 - 22 April 2002 / HD RA, 23 April 2002 - 16 October 2006 / HD RA, 17 October 2006 - 19 October 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Iraq (25 March 2002 - 12 July 2003; 16 January 2005 - 12 January 2006) f. Awards and Decorations: ICM-2CS, ARCOM-2, AAM-2, PUC, AGCM-5, NDSM, AFEM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-3 g. Performance Ratings: 1 June 2008 - 30 May 2009 / Marginal 31 May 2009 - 22 October 2009 / Marginal 23 October 2010 - 31 May 2011 / Fully Capable 1 June 2011 - 31 May 2013 / Fully Capable 1 June 2013 - 16 January 2014 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 12 September 2013, reflects the applicant tested positive for DAMP 448 > LoL (D-Amphetamine), during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 28 August 2013. CID Report of Investigation Initial Final, dated 10 October 2013, reflects an investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of Wrongful Use of a dangerous drug when the applicant submitted a urine specimen on 28 August 2013, during the conduct of a unit urinalysis test, which subsequently tested positive for DAMP. FG Article 15, dated 16 January 2014, for wrongfully using Adderall (between 28 July and 28 August 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4; (suspended); and extra duty for 45 days. Record Of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 14 March 2014, reflects the suspended portion of the punishment-imposed 16 January 2014, was vacated for: Article 92, dereliction in the performance of duty, on or about 17 January 2014, to about 20 February 2014, were derelict in the performance of those duties in which the applicant willfully failed to perform duties as a supply sergeant, as it was the applicant's duty to do. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 25 March 2014, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. 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 PTSD with positive results and 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 Adjustment Disorder, ADHD (per behavioral health), Critical Stress history (per FAP). Service member has been screened for substance use disorders (alcohol and drugs). Finding: The applicant did not present any substance use related concerns. Service member (SM) seen for numerous stressors at Behavioral Health and FAP. The applicant is taking Celexa, Adderall, Meclazine among other medication for the disorder. SM able to function at work and home. Also experiencing depression and anxiety, which are seen as reactions to current situations. SM referred for evaluation pending Chapter 14-12 c (Serious Offense). SI/H1 convincingly denied. No observed behavioral abnormalities, no evidence of thought disorder or psychotic symptoms. This individual is mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, and has the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative/board proceedings. This SM meets retention standards, which warrants disposition through medical administrative action, deemed appropriate by command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application and ARBA letter. 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 an upgrade to honorable. 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 under the direction of a mental health doctor at the time and tested positive on a UA. The applicant contends being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 25 March 2014, which indicates the applicant had been screened for PTSD with positive results and diagnosis with Adjustment Disorder, ADHD (per behavioral health), Critical Stress history (per FAP). The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. 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: PTSD and ADHD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that applicant has diagnoses of PTSD and ADHD although the latter is not typically considered a potentially mitigating condition it is relevant in the applicant's circumstance. (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 established diagnoses of PTSD (made while on AD and now service connected) and ADHD; although the latter is not typically considered mitigating, it is relevant in the current circumstances. Under normal circumstances PTSD is associated with substance misuse due to the natural history of the disorder being associated with self-medication of symptoms. In applicant's case, applicant also has diagnosed ADHD with a history of treatment with stimulant medication including that which led to separation, although at the time of the event it was not a prescribed medication. (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 and ADHD outweighed the basis for separation - wrongful use of Adderall - for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The Board found validity in this contention, and based on the applicant's PTSD and ADHD outweighing the basis for separation, the Board determined an upgrade of the narrative reason for discharge and RE code is warranted. (2) The applicant contends being under the direction of a mental health doctor at the time and tested positive on a UA. 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 and ADHD outweighing the applicant's drug abuse basis for separation. (3) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board considered this contention, but does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD and ADHD outweighing the basis for separation - wrongful use of Adderall. Thus, relief is warranted. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the characterization of service due to it already being Honorable. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) based on the applicant's PTSD and ADHD outweighing the wrongful use of Adderall basis for separation, 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: 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 AR20210001813 1