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: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. a. Applicant's Request and Issues. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, in 2004, the applicant made the biggest mistake in the applicant's military career. The applicant put the family, other Soldiers, and the country at risk by the applicant's actions. When the applicant was discharged from the Army, the applicant wanted to make a difference. Since the discharge, the applicant has been diagnosed with PTSD. The applicant chooses not to use as an excuse for the applicant's behavior in the past and the future, but it does explain the change in the applicant's character at the time. The applicant is not the person the applicant was in 2004. The applicant has sought treatment for PTSD and continues to work towards changing the life for the better. If the discharge is upgraded, the applicant will be able to attend school. The applicant's career path is to work with youth and help them discover who they are and where they are going. The applicant honors the status as a veteran and is proud to say the applicant served. The applicant desires to continue to give back to the country with the applicant's story and efforts of change by speaking with the youth and obtaining a degree in education. The applicant knows having an education is where to show the biggest impact for the applicant and the youth the applicant encounters. The applicant is heavily involved with the applicant's 15-year old child's football team and coaches at the school. The applicant also works with students in the Toledo and Cincinnati area and graduated from Culinary School and Sinclair Community College in 2017. b. Board Type and Decision. In a records review conducted on 12 July 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation and characterization was both proper and equitable. However, the Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is inequitable based on the applicant's service. 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. 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, Chapter 14- 12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 2 August 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: Undated (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant tested positive for THC on 7 January 2005. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: Undated (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 June 2005 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 November 2002 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 93 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92G10, Food Service Specialist / 2 years, 8 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (11 January 2005 - 25 July 2005) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, WOTEM, WOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 30 July 2004, for failing to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty on or about 16 April 2004; wrongfully used marijuana on or about 20 March 2004 and on or about 28 April 2004; fail to stop at a posted stop sign on or about 11 February 2004; and improperly parked a vehicle on or about 13 April 2004. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $569 pay per month for two months (suspended); and extra duty for 45 days. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 18 January 2005, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 33 (marijuana), during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 7 January 2005. CID Report, dated 10 March 2005, reflects probable cause existed to believe the applicant committed the offense of Wrongful Use of a Controlled Substance when the applicant provided a urine sample during a Unit Urinalysis Inspection, which was examined by the Forensic Toxicology Drug Testing Laboratory, Fort Meade, MD 20755, revealing the presence of Marijuana. FG Article 15, dated 22 April 2005, for wrongfully using marijuana on or about 2 January 2004. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $617 pay per month for two months; and extra duty for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Applicant Provided and/or AMHHR Listed PTSD / TBI / Other Behavioral Health Conditions: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 7 March 2005, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command, the applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings, and the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Emotions. The applicant provided a copy of VA medical treatment records, dated 23 May 2007, which reflect the applicant was provisionally diagnosed with PTSD. It was noted Pt appears to have Iraq-induced PTSD in conjunction with MJ abuse. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD form 293; DD form 214; VA medical treatment records. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is involved with coaching football at the child's school and works with the youth at multiple schools in the inner-city school system. The applicant has graduated from Culinary School. 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) states that abuse of illegal drugs is serious misconduct. (7) Chapter 15 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army's best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary's approved designee as announced in updated memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. 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 being diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. The applicant provided a copy of VA medical treatment records, dated 23 May 2007, which reflect the applicant was provisionally diagnosed with PTSD and noted that the applicant appears to have Iraq-induced PTSD in conjunction with MJ abuse. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a behavioral health evaluation (BHE) on 7 March 2005, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and recognized right from wrong, the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Emotions, and the behavior health exam was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends an upgrade would allow educational benefits through the GI Bill. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. The applicant is involved with coaching football at the child's school and works with the youth at multiple schools in the inner-city school system. The applicant has also graduated from Culinary School and Community College. 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. 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 applicant's Adjustment Disorder and PTSD may mitigate the applicant's basis of separation - Drug use. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant's Adjustment Disorder and PTSD existed during service. (3) Does the condition or experience excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that, while the applicant was diagnosed by the VA with PTSD based on the applicant's deployment to Iraq between 11 January 2005 to 25 June 2005, the applicant's PTSD does not mitigate the applicant's drug use because the applicant tested positive for Marijuana prior to the applicant's 2005 deployment and the applicant previously tested positive on two occasions in 2004. Further, the Board Medical Advisor found that the applicant's Adjustment Disorder did not mitigate the applicant's drug use as self-medication is not part of the sequela of symptoms associated with Adjustment Disorder. (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 the applicant PTSD does not outweigh the applicant's medically unmitigated basis of separation- Drug Use (THC) because the applicant's official records, including the applicant's medical records indicate that the applicant's drug use occurred prior to the applicant's Iraq deployment and the applicant had previously used illegal drugs in 2004. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends being diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. The Board considered this contention and determined that, while based on the DOD and VA health records. It revealed the applicant was diagnosed PTSD. However, the BH condition did not mitigate use of THC and Marijuana. The misconduct occurred before the etiology of the diagnoses PTSD. (2) The applicant contends an upgrade would allow educational benefits through the GI Bill. The Board determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare, or VA loans, do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. (3) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings. (4) The applicant is involved with coaching football at the child's school and works with the youth at multiple schools in the inner-city school system. The applicant has also graduated from Culinary School and Community College. The ADRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, no law or regulation provides an unfavorable discharge that must be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life after leaving the service. The Board may consider the outstanding post- service conduct and the applicant's performance and conduct during the service under review during proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate that previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. In this case, the Board decided the discharge was proper and equitable and granted relief in the form of a change to the narrative reason and SPD code. c. The Board determined the request upon finding the separation and characterization was both proper and equitable. However, the Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is 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. 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, despite applying liberal consideration, the applicant's PTSD did not mitigate the offenses of Wrongful Use of a Controlled Substance, THC and Marijuana. The applicant did not supply sufficient evidence to support contentions, and 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. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) as the misconduct occurred 18 years ago, 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 change to RE-4 to be 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: 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 AR20210002728 1