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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, an upgrade would better the applicant's life and the applicant could proudly say the applicant is a veteran of the Armed Forces. For years, the applicant did not openly share this information, nor did the applicant attempt to use the benefits available to the applicant because of a heavy guilt placed upon the applicant's shoulders. The applicant accepts full responsibility for the actions and understands exactly what the applicant did to be in this position. The applicant requests reconsideration of the discharge because the applicant deserves an upgrade. Although the applicant was discharged from the Army many years ago, the core values are ever present in the applicant's mind and actions. Although the was discharged many years ago, the Army's core values are ever present in the applicant's mind and actions. The experience has afforded the applicant the opportunity to become better, realize the mistakes, and correct them. The applicant was 17 years old, misguided, and lost. The applicant was plunged into a foreign land with limitless opportunities to explore oneself, and although some choices resulted in the applicant's discharge, there were many which allowed the applicant to be a positive force in the applicant's company. The applicant's boots and uniform were above standard. Soldiers sought the applicant out and offered compensation to starch and press their uniforms. The unit the applicant was assigned held the fastest time for erecting a field site. The applicant was seen as a leader who was fast tracking to become an E-5 in record time. Hindsight is 20/20 and it is no different in this situation. The applicant rebelled against superiors because the applicant was an ignorant teenager who did not understand or appreciate the hierarchy of the military. The applicant believed the applicant's hard work and commitment to the fellow Soldiers was sufficient for advancement and was dissuaded by being forced to parade before the Soldier of the Month board as the applicant's promotion was dangled before the applicant like a carrot. The applicant did not understand the complex structure of the ranking system and viewed it as an insult. The applicant turned bitter and reacted instead of responding in a mature manner. The applicant has grown tremendously over the years and owes the military a sincere and heartfelt thanks for setting the applicant on the proper path. The applicant has been viewed as a source of inspiration and motivation for peers, clients, and friends. The applicant requests an upgrade to close one chapter of the applicant's life and begin another. The applicant is uncertain of what lies ahead, but knows the applicant must put forth the effort to become a decent person. With the conclusion of the applicant's military status, the applicant is hopeful of what life has to offer. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 18 April 2023, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, personal accountability for misconduct, and one time drug use over 20 years ago. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to Honorable and changed 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. The Board determined the reentry eligibility (RE) code 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 / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 22 September 2001 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 6 August 2001 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant tested positive during a unit urinalysis for marijuana and ecstasy. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 6 August 2001 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 7 September 2007 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 May 1999 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 31R10, Multichannel Transmission Systems Operator / 2 years, 3 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Field Grade Article 15, dated 10 July 2001, for wrongfully using ecstasy (between 30 March and 30 April 2001) and marijuana (between 30 April and 13 May 2001). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $521 pay per month for two months; and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Developmental Counseling Form, dated 16 July 2001, for pending separation and request for mental evaluation. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: Memorandum, dated 17 July 2001, reflects the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation. The evaluation revealed the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant met medical retention requirements and there was no psychiatric disease or defect which warranted disposition through medical channels. The applicant was diagnosed with rule out substance abuse and rule out adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of mood and conduct. There were no psychiatric findings. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; two third party statements. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has been in various positions in life and has been viewed as a source of inspiration and motivation for peers, clients, and friends. 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 14-12c prescribes 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, misconduct. 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 waivable and nonwaivable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes. RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. 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 youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of the discharge. The AMHRR shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. The applicant contends good service. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends being in various positions in life and has been viewed as a source of inspiration and motivation for peers, clients, and friends. 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 third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. They all recognize the applicant's good conduct after leaving the Army. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. 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? No. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed DoD and VA medical records and found the applicant had no mitigating BH diagnoses. The applicant provided no documents or testimony of an in-service condition or experience, that, when applying liberal consideration, could have excused or mitigated a discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? N/A (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? N/A (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of the discharge. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant's youth and immaturity did not outweigh the seriousness of the applicant's marijuana and MDMA use. The Board determined that there is insufficient evidence in the applicant's official record or provided by the applicant that the applicant was not provided sufficient access to BH resources. However, the Board voted to upgrade the characterization of service and the narrative reason for discharge based on the applicant's length of service, personal accountability for misconduct and one time drug use outweighing the discharge. (2) The applicant contends good service. The Board considered the totality of the applicant's service record. (3) The applicant contends being in various positions in life and has been viewed as a source of inspiration and motivation for peers, clients, and friends. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant's post-service accomplishments do not outweigh the misconduct; however, the Board voted to upgrade the characterization of service and the narrative reason for discharge based on the applicant's length of service, personal accountability for misconduct and one time drug use outweighing the discharge. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, personal accountability for misconduct and one time drug use. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to Honorable and changed 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. The Board determined the reentry eligibility (RE) code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address further 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 to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's length of service, personal accountability for misconduct and one time drug use outweighed the applicant's misconduct of marijuana and MDMA use over 20 years ago. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (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 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: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions)/JKN d. Change RE Code to: No Change 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 AR20210002117 1