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, the applicant was discharged for reasons related to PTSD, after being wounded by a terrorist explosion requiring the applicant to be medically evacuated from Iraq. The applicant was assigned to the wounded warrior’s unit for 14 months waiting for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). During this time, the applicant was abandoned by the family, spouse, and children. After months of hospitalization and stress conditions, the applicant began self-medicating with cannabis, resulting in a demotion and a discharge. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 20 September 2022, and by a 4-1 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 19 May 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 March 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: It was determined by a CID Investigation the applicant wrongfully conspired to distribute marijuana, was in possession of marijuana, and was carrying a concealed weapon on Fort Stewart. The applicant tested positive on a urinalysis for marijuana on 17 December 2008 and on 26 September 2008. On 19 April 2008, the applicant was involved in an altercation with another Soldier and was also found carrying a concealed knife. These actions are not becoming of a Soldier, nor do they live up to the Army Values. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 1 April 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 1 April 2009, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 April 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 March 2006 / 3 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / GED / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13D10, Field Artillery Automation / 3 years, 1 month, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 May 2007 – 14 November 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ICM-A, GWOTEM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 19 April 2008, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Assault Consummated by a Battery (On Post); and, Failure to Obey lawful Order or Regulation (On Post). The report reflects a total of three offenses, however offense number two was void from the report. FG Article 15, dated 19 August 2008, for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully carrying a concealed knife on person (19 April 2008); wrongfully failed to obey a lawful order by wrongfully consuming alcohol (16 April 2008). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 (suspended); and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 3 October 2008, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 354 (marijuana), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 26 September 2008. Military Police Report, dated 8 October 2008, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Wrongful use of Marijuana, Determined by Urinalysis. Record Of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 15 October 2008, reflects the suspended portion of the punishment imposed on 19 August 2008, was vacated for: failing to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty: high risk accountability. In violation of Article 86 UCMJ. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 30 December 2008, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 76 (marijuana), during a Probable Cause (PO) urinalysis testing, conducted on 17 December 2008. CID Report of Investigation - Final, dated 3 February 2009, reflects an investigation determined the applicant and C. committed the offense of Conspiracy when they both conspired to arrange the Distribution of Marijuana to a CID Source. Further investigation determined the applicant committed the offenses of Wrongful Distribution of Marijuana, Wrongful Possession of Marijuana, and Carrying a Concealed Weapon, when the applicant arranged the Distribution of Marijuana between C. and a CID Source by coordinating a controlled purchase and handling the money transaction between the CID Source and C. During the applicant’s apprehension, the applicant was found possessing Marijuana and a concealed fixed blade knife, which was discovered on person after informing CID agents the applicant did not possess any weapons. FG Article 15, dated 11 February 2009, for conspiring with SPC J. C. to commit an offense under the UMCJ, by distributing 3.4 grams of marijuana, and sold 3.4 grams of marijuana (22 November 2008); fail to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty (9 January 2009); wrongfully carrying a concealed knife on person (22 November 2008); wrongfully use marijuana (between10 and 16 September and between 18 November and 17 December 2008); wrongfully possess 2 grams of marijuana (22 November 2008); and wrongfully distribute 3.4 grams of marijuana. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Applicant provided and/or AMHRR listed Behavioral Health Conditions: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, undated, reflects the applicant was mentally responsible and could participate in the proceedings. The had a pattern of behavior problems to include AR-15 for numerous behavioral incidents including illicit drugs to include marijuana use and continuous drinking during duty hours. The applicant was seen at a Behavioral Health Clinic, and the AHLTA file was reviewed. This individual had been hospitalized on several occasions for psychiatric evaluation and had been seen by multiple behavioral health/social work/ASAP providers for assessment but has repeatedly declined behavioral health interventions. The applicant had a history of auditory hallucinations, paranoia, depression, nightmares, alcohol abuse, anxiety and problems with sleep that have resolved or improved. The applicant denied current suicidal ideation or homicidal ideation. The applicant had been prescribed the following medications: Prozac and trazodone. According to command this Service Member’s behavior suggest ambivalence towards a future career in the Army. The applicant’s active psychiatric diagnoses were: Axis I: Depression, Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depression, Opioid Related Disorder, Alcohol Abuse; Axis II: Possible Personality Disorder with Passive Aggressive Traits. There were no psychiatric disease or defects warranting disposition through medical channels. It was unlikely that mental health interventions in an effort to rehabilitate or develop this individual into a satisfactory member of the military would be successful. Service Member is cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command, such as separation under AR 635-200, Ch 5-17. The applicant met the retention standards. The applicant provided a copy of a VA disability rating decision, dated 25 March 2011, reflecting the applicant was rated 70 percent for: adjustment disorder with Anxiety and Depression Disorder, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, with Cognitive Disorder, status Post-Concussion Syndrome. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; VA Rating Decision; Memorandum: Letter of Intent for Medical Board Processing; Chronological Record of Medical Care. 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 14-12c 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 (serious offense). 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-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. 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 record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends being hospitalized post-deployment for 14 months waiting for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) for Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), which affected the applicant’s behavior and led the applicant to begin self-medicating with cannabis, resulting in a demotion and a discharge. The applicant’s AMHRR contains documentation which supports a diagnosis of in- service Axis I: Depression, Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depression, Opioid Related Disorder, Alcohol Abuse; Axis II: Possible Personality Disorder with Passive Aggressive Traits. The record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE), which indicates the applicant the applicant was mentally responsible and could participate in the proceedings. There were no psychiatric disease or defects warranting disposition through medical channels. It was unlikely that mental health interventions in an effort to rehabilitate or develop this individual into a satisfactory member of the military would be successful. Service Member is cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command, such as separation under AR 635-200, Ch 5-17. The applicant met the retention standards. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant provided a copy of a VA disability rating decision, dated 25 March 2011, reflecting the applicant was rated 70 percent for: adjustment disorder with Anxiety and Depression Disorder, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, with Cognitive Disorder, status Post-Concussion Syndrome. The applicant contends family issues affected behavior and ultimately contributed to the discharge. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. 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, along with TBI related symptoms and psychotic symptoms. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant’s PTSD was present during the applicant’s time in service along with TBI related symptoms and psychotic symptoms. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that applicant’s PTSD/TBI related symptoms and psychotic symptoms mitigate the applicant’s marijuana possession and abuse as there is an association between PTSD/TBI related symptoms/psychotic symptoms and use of alcohol/illicit drugs to self-medicate symptoms and a nexus between the applicant’s conditions and the pattern of substance abusing behavior the applicant demonstrated. However, Board Medical Advisor opined that the applicant’s behavioral health conditions do not mitigate the applicant’s offenses of conspiring to distribute marijuana and carrying a concealed weapon (knife) because both offenses are purposeful acts and, even if intoxicated or under the influence of an illicit drug, there is no natural history or sequelae of PTSD or TBI related symptoms and psychotic symptoms. (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, while the applicant’s the applicant’s PTSD/TBI related symptoms/psychotic symptoms mitigate the applicant’s marijuana possession and abuse offenses, the applicant’s the applicant’s PTSD/TBI related symptoms/psychotic symptoms do not outweigh the applicant’s medically unmitigated offenses of conspiring to distribute marijuana and carrying a concealed weapon. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends that a discharge upgrade is warranted because the applicant the applicant has PTSD, was MEDEVAC from AR Ramadi Iraq after being wounded by terrorist explosion and was assigned to the Wounded Warrior Unit (WWU) for 14 months waiting for a MEB for TBI. The Board noted Army Regulation 635-200 which stipulates, in pertinent part, that commanders will not separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. Ultimately, the Board determined that the applicant’s contention does not fall within the purview of the ADRB. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using a DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may be obtained from a Veterans’ Service Organization. (2) The applicant contends a discharge upgrade is warranted because during the time the applicant was at the WWU, the applicant’s family (wife and kids) abandoned the applicant through months of hospitalization, causing the applicant to self-medicate with Cannabis, resulting in the applicant’s demotion and discharge. The Board considered the totality of the evidence, including the applicant’s contention regarding family issues affecting the applicant’s judgment and determined that due to the nature and severity of the applicant’s misconduct, a discharge upgrade is not warranted. 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 applicant’s characterization of service because, after applying liberal consideration of all the evidence that, while the applicant’s the applicant’s PTSD/TBI related symptoms/psychotic symptoms mitigate the applicant’s marijuana possession and abuse offenses, the applicant’s the applicant’s PTSD/TBI related symptoms/psychotic symptoms do not outweigh the applicant’s medically unmitigated offenses of conspiring to distribute marijuana and carrying a concealed weapon. The Board also considered the applicant’s contention regarding the applicant’s family issues while assigned to the WWU and found insufficient evidence to support a discharge upgrade. 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 (Under Honorable Conditions) was proper and equitable as the applicant’s misconduct fell below that level of meritorious service warranted for an upgrade to Honorable. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, 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. 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 AR20210002513 1