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 to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was related to substance abuse issues. After returning from serving in Afghanistan, the applicant struggled with readjusting to the garrison environment. The applicant attempted to seek medical assistance but was unable to acquire psychological help. As a result, the applicant turned to self-medication and became chemically dependent on controlled substances, which led to the discharge. The VA diagnosed the applicant with PTSD and assigned a disability rating of 100 percent. As a result of receiving counseling through the VA, the applicant has abstained from using any controlled substance in two years. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 22 June 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 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 (Minor Infractions) / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a / JKN / RE-4 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 1 March 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 February 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c (2), Misconduct (Drug Abuse), the applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant wrongfully used Marijuana, a Schedule I controlled substance, on 18 August and 17 October 2012, and between 7 October and 6 November 2012; and the applicant wrongfully used D-Amphetamine, a Schedule II controlled substance between 1 and 6 November 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 2 February 2013, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 February 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 August 2011 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / High School Graduate / 115 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 12B1P, Combat Engineer / 1 year, 7 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (12 April 2012 – 6 September 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Commander’s Report, dated 7 February 2013, reflects the applicant received a FG Article 15, dated 4 December 2012, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 18 August and 17 October 2012). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $745 pay per month for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days; and an oral reprimand. Commander’s Report, dated 7 February 2013, reflects the applicant received a FG Article 15, dated 9 January 2013, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 7 October and 6 November 2012), and wrongfully using D-Amphetamine (between 1 and 6 November 2012). The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $745 pay per month for two months (suspended); extra duty and restriction for 45 days; and an oral reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Veterans Administration Disability rating decision, dated 1 April 2015, reflecting the applicant was rated 100 percent disability for PTSD with opioid use disorder in early remission. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; ARBA letter; and VA Rating Decision. Additional Evidence: Third-party 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) 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) 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. (5) 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. (6) Paragraph 14-12a addresses minor disciplinary infractions, defined as a pattern of misconduct, consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. 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 “JKN” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (minor infractions). 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’s AMHRR includes partial facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. The applicant’s AMHRR does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant’s electronic signature. The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, by reason of Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a characterization of service of honorable. The applicant contends self-medication and becoming chemically dependent on controlled substances led to the discharge, and the VA diagnosed the applicant with PTSD and granted a disability rating of 100 percent. The Veteran’s Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty. The available evidence in the AMHRR is void of any indication the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during the discharge processing, warranting separation processing through medical channels. 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, 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 is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for 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 is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for PTSD. Given the nexus between PTSD and self-medicating with substances, applicant’s PTSD mitigates the drug use that led to his separation. The applicant has an HD suggesting that the appropriate mitigation has already been applied. The narrative reason is appropriate, and the Board’s Medical Advisor recommends that the RE Code be no higher than a 3 due to applicant’s service connection for a BH condition. The board, to include the BMA, ultimately decided that an RE Code of 4 was appropriate given the nature and severity of the mental illness that is service limiting. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor, and as a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and determined that the applicant in service adjustment disorder outweighed the Misconduct (Drug Abuse) - basis of separation. However, the Board determined no upgrade to the narrative reason for discharge or RE code was appropriate as outlined in parts 9b and 9d. The board, to include the BMA, ultimately decided that an RE-4 was appropriate given the nature and severity of the mental illness that is service limiting. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant contends self-medication and becoming chemically dependent on controlled substances led to the discharge, and the VA diagnosed the applicant with PTSD and granted a disability rating of 100 percent. The Board considered this contention and determined while there is mitigation due to the nexus between PTSD and the nature of the misconduct, the characterization of service is appropriate as it is already Honorable. The Board further determined not to change the applicant’s narrative reason for discharge or RE code because the current narrative reason and RE code are proper and equitable. While the BMA opined that the RE-Code should be no higher than 3, the board, to include the BMA, ultimately determined that an RE Code of 4 was appropriate given the nature and severity of the mental illness that is service limiting. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of 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 characterization of service due to it already being Honorable. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code, and 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. The Board ultimately determined that an RE Code of 4 was appropriate given the nature and severity of the applicant’s mental illness that is service limiting. 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 AR20210001852 1