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, having been diagnosed with severe PTSD since the discharge and receiving a 100 percent disability rating for it through the Department of Veterans Affairs. When speaking to medical personnel during the applicant's treatment, they believed that the applicant's undiagnosed PTSD played a role in the actions leading to the less than favorable discharge. Before the one and only incident, the applicant was an exemplary Soldier and does not believe the discharge properly portrays the honorable and valorous service to the United States Army and the country. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 26 August 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board applied liberal consideration and determined that according to the available evidence the applicant's use of cocaine, which is the basis of separation, is mitigated by the applicant's PTSD. 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 and the reentry code to RE-3, after considering the length, quality, and combat service in addition to the applicant's PTSD diagnosis. 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 12 July 2010 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 January 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant's use of cocaine, a controlled substance. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 14 January 2010, the applicant elected to personally appear before an administrative separation board. On 4 May 2010, 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 26 May 2010, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 June 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 28 February 2008 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / Some College / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 18B2P, SF Weapons Sergeant / 11 years, 10 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 27 March 2001 - 27 August 2002 / HD IADT, 21 July 1999 - 28 April 2000 / HD (Concurrent Service) RA, 28 August 2002 - 1 May 2005 / HD RA, 2 May 2005 - 27 February 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (26 January 2003 - 1 August 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: SF Tab, ARCOM-2, AAM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR g. Performance Ratings: 29 January 2007 - 31 December 2008 / Among The Best. h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 25 September 2009, reflects the applicant on or about 18 September 2009, and SFC M. B. were involved in a motor vehicle incident with the Comayagua, Honduran Police (CHP), in Honduras. This incident led to the applicant's arrest and the applicant was unaccounted for until the following day. Due to the political situation in Honduras, the Soto Cano Airbase, Honduras, where the unit was assigned, had been under curfew. As such, the applicant was also in violation SOCSOUTH, AOB and JTF-B curfews. The applicant was also engaged in a physical confrontation with the CHP when they attempted to put one of them in a jail cell. In this incident, at least one CHP officer sustained a bruise to the eye. Additionally, both of them also sustained injuries when the CHP officers attempted to subdue the applicant. The injuries both of them sustained were significant enough that the two had to be escorted to the medical clinic for treatment, which included X-Rays. The applicant had admitted being aware of the SOUTHCOM and SOCSOUTH non-consumption of alcohol policy, and that the applicant had been drinking alcohol prior to the motor vehicle incident. The imposing authority had been informed the applicant was driving the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. Based on the applicant's age, rank, and experience, the actions show that the applicant exercised poor judgment and leadership. Consultation report on Contributor Material, dated 26 October 2009, reflects the applicant's blood was screened for amphetamine, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, cannabinoids, cocaine, opiates and phencyclidine by immunoassay or chromatography. The following drugs were detected: Positive Cocaine metabolite: Benzoylecgonine was detected in the blood by immunoassay and confirmed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. The blood contained 0.14 mg/L of benzoylecgonine as quantitated by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 10 December 2009, reflects the applicant was mentally responsible with a clear thinking process and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings. The applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command. The applicant was diagnosed with: Occupational Problem. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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(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 record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. Based on the applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, "AR 635-200, PARA 14- 12C (2)"; block 26, "JKK"; and block 28, "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)." The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). Soldiers processed for misconduct under these provisions will be assigned a Narrative Reason for Separation as Misconduct (Serious Offense) and an SPD code of JKQ. The applicant contends suffering from undiagnosed PTSD, which affect behavior and led to the discharge. The applicant also contends being rated 100 percent service connected by the VA for PTSD. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The applicant's AMHRR contains documentation which supports a diagnosis of in-service Occupational Problem. The record shows the applicant underwent a behavioral health evaluation (BHE) on 10 December 2009, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible with a clear thinking process and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings. The applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command. The BHE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention the discharge resulted from any medical condition or VA service-connection for PTSD. The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of 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 the following diagnoses or experiences which can, under certain circumstances, potentially mitigate or excuse misconduct leading to separation: Adjustment Disorder, PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant's Adjustment Disorder and 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 given the nexus between PTSD and self-medicating with substances, applicant's PTSD likely contributed to the applicant's use of cocaine. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board applied liberal consideration and considered the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, and determined that according to the available evidence the applicant's cocaine use is outweighed by the applicant's PTSD. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The Board determined that relief was warranted based on the applicant's PTSD in addition to the length, quality, and combat service, outweighing the basis of separation. (2) The applicant contends suffering from undiagnosed PTSD, which affect behavior and led to the discharge. The applicant also contends being rated 100 percent service connected by the VA for PTSD. The ADRB is not bound by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decisions. There is no law or regulation which requires that an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the Board determination that there was a condition or experience that existed during the applicant's time in service. The Board must also articulate the nexus between that condition or experience and the basis for separation. Then, the Board must determine that the condition or experience outweighed the basis for separation. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former service member is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the ARBA when determining a member's discharge characterization. In this case, the Board determined that the Board determined that this contention was valid and determined that the applicant's PTSD mitigates the applicant's use of cocaine. Given the applicant's disciplinary record the Board did not vote to upgrade solely due the applicant's PTSD diagnosis, The Board determined relief was warranted after considering the length, quality, and combat service in addition to the applicant's PTSD diagnosis. (3) The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. While the Board noted the applicant's multiple instances of misconduct, the Board determined that the length and quality of the applicant's service, in addition to the applicant's PTSD, outweighed the misconduct thus warranting relief in the form of an upgrade to Honorable. (4) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board determined this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to the applicant's quality of service to include the applicant's combat tour, in addition to the applicant's PTSD diagnosis. c. The Board determined that according to the available evidence the applicant's use of cocaine, which is the basis of separation, is mitigated by the applicant's PTSD. However, the Board did not vote to upgrade solely due to the applicant's PTSD, as there is no mitigation for the assault found in the applicant's disciplinary record which, according to the Board, contributed to the applicant's discharge. The Board determined relief was warranted after considering the length, quality, and combat service in addition to the applicant's PTSD diagnosis. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because after applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the Board determined the applicant's PTSD, in addition to the applicant's length, quality and combat service, outweighed the applicant's cocaine abuse and the assault that was found in applicant's records. 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 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: Honorable 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 AR20210002526 1