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 circumstances were a result of post- traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, and depression. The discharge was because of underlying issues of multiple mental disorders, which the applicant believes mitigated the discharge. The applicant was attempting to self-medicate and was not given any help for the underlying issues. The applicant's service from 2007 to November 2010 was outstanding until the applicant had a nervous breakdown. The applicant was told by Walter Reed Hospital, the applicant had a mood disorder, anxiety, and dysthymia, which later turned into major depressive disorder. The applicant was not prescribed medication or did not receive any treatment for the mental issues until discharged. The mental issues were brushed off by the command. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 18 August 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI and PTSD diagnoses) mitigating the drug abuse. 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, and the reentry code to RE-3. 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, Paragraph 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 23 December 2010 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 December 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant was found to have used MDMA from a urinalysis test conducted on 18 November 2010. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 17 December 2010 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 17 December 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 April 2010 / 3 years, 11 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / GED / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19K10, M1 Armor Crewman / 3 years, 5 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 16 July 2007 - 21 April 2010 / HD IADT, 6 August 2008 - 18 February 2009 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 2 December 2010, for wrongfully communicating a threat, to wit: "I might end up grabbing a weapon and shooting someone" (29 November 2010). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $723 pay per month for two months (suspended); and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Developmental Counseling Form, dated 7 December 2010, for pending separation from the service. CID Report of Investigation - Initial Final, dated 14 December 2010, reflects an investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of Wrongful Use of a Controlled Substance when the applicant submitted a urine specimen on 18 November 2010, during the conduct of a unit urinalysis test, which subsequently tested positive for Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) commonly known as Ecstasy. The applicant provided Department of Veterans Affairs letter, dated 14 January 2018, reflects the applicant received a combined rating of 70 percent service-connected disability. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided William Beaumont Army Medical Center, medical documents, dated 23 September 2010, which reflect the applicant was evaluated because the First Sergeant heard the applicant state the applicant was suicidal. The applicant made a statement to the psychiatrist the applicant was not suicidal and had no history of suicide. The applicant's spouse left the applicant with the applicant's two year old child. The applicant was diagnosed with situational depression and returned to unit with an escort. The applicant provided Disability Determination Explanation, which reflects on 23 December 2010, the Walter Reed Army Hospital diagnosed the applicant with dysthymic disorder; adjustment disorder with disturbances of emotions and conduct. A psychological consultative examination on 13 March 2014, indicated the applicant was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. The applicant reported symptoms of anxiety, depression, PTSD, mania, and thought disorder. Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 23 December 2010, reflects the applicant was mentally responsible for the events which led to the evaluation; had the mental capacity to understand and could participate in the proceedings; and met medical retention requirements. The applicant was diagnosed with adjustment with disturbance of emotions and conduct; history of conduct disorder; evidence of antisocial personality disorder. The applicant provided NSG Clinic Note, Nursing Outpatient Note, dated 2 August 2017, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with major depression. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; Social Security Administration Function Report - Adult; William Beaumont Army Medical Center medical documents; Disability Determination Explanation; NSG Clinic Note; VA letter; USAR separation orders. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends studying criminal justice at Lackawanna College. 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 a 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 PTSD, bipolar disorder, depression, and other mental health conditions affected behavior which led to the discharge. The applicant provided several medical documents indicating a diagnosis of dysthymic disorder; adjustment disorder with disturbances of emotions and conduct; bipolar disorder; and major depression. The VA rated the applicant a combined rating of 70 percent for service-connected disability, but the document did not disclose which medical conditions contributed to the rating. The Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) shows the applicant underwent a behavioral health evaluation (BHE) on 23 December 2010, which reflects the applicant was mentally responsible for the events which led to the evaluation; had the mental capacity to understand and could participate in the proceedings; and met medical retention requirements. The applicant was diagnosed with adjustment with disturbance of emotions and conduct; history of conduct disorder; and evidence of antisocial personality disorder. The BHE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends self-medicating because of not receiving any assistance from the command. Army Regulation 600-85, paragraph 7-3 entitled voluntary (self) identification and referral, states voluntary (self) ID is the most desirable method of identifying substance use disorder. The individual whose performance, social conduct, interpersonal relations, or health becomes impaired because of these problems has the personal obligation to seek help. Soldiers seeking self-referral for problematic substance use may access services through BH services for a SUD evaluation. The Limited Use Policy exists to encourage Soldiers to proactively seek help. The AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends good service. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. The applicant contends studying criminal justice at Lackawanna 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 the following diagnoses or experiences which can, under certain circumstances, potentially mitigate or excuse misconduct leading to separation: PTSD, Major Depressive Disorder, Dysthymic Disorder, Adjustment Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with Adjustment Disorder and Dysthymic Disorder and is serviced connected by the VA for PTSD with Major Depressive Disorder. (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, depression, and self-medicating with substances, there may have been an association between applicant's BH conditions and the drug use that led to separation. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the applicant's PTSD, MDD outweighed the drug abuse basis for separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends PTSD, bipolar disorder, and depression and other mental health conditions affected behavior which led the discharge. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to PTSD/MDD mitigating the applicant's drug abuse. (2) The applicant contends self-medicating because of not receiving any assistance from the command. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to PTSD/MDD mitigating the applicant's drug abuse. (3) The applicant contends good service. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's PTSD/MDD fully outweighing the applicant's drug abuse. (4) The applicant contends studying criminal justice at Lackawanna College. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's PTSD/MDD fully outweighing the applicant's drug abuse. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI and PTSD diagnoses) mitigating the drug abuse. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD/MDD mitigated the applicant's drug abuse. 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 AR20210002740 1