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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was for substance abuse, which became an issue for the applicant due to the applicant’s combat tour in Iraq, and the applicant had no other way to cope. The applicant expresses regret and embarrassment for prior decision- making related to substance abuse, and present fear of judgment. The applicant states being a husband, and father to two wonderful children, and requests an upgrade in characterization for access to healthcare services from the VA. In a records review conducted on 26 April 2022, and by a 5-0 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: 16 April 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 February 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: the applicant committed a violation of Article 112a wrongful use of a controlled substance by wrongfully using cocaine on two separate occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 18 February 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 29 March 2004, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 6 April 2004 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 5 August 1999 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 years / HS Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 15G10, Aircraft Structural Repairer / 4 years, 8 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait - Iraq (27 January 2003 – 15 July 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, PUC g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 2 August 2002, reflects the applicant tested positive for cocaine, during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 29 July 2002. FG Article 15, dated 26 September 2002, for wrongful use of some amount of cocaine between 30 June and 29 July 2002. The punishment consisted of a reduction to PVT/E-1, forfeiture of $552 pay for two months and extra duty for 45 days. Personnel Action form, dated 30 September 2002, reflects the applicant’s reduction to PVT/E-1 Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 24 October 2003, reflects the applicant tested positive for cocaine 111, during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 14 October 2003. Charge Sheet, dated 18 November 2003, reflects the applicant was charged with: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a, the applicant, at or near Savannah, GA on 9 October 2003, did wrongfully use cocaine. Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial, dated 21 November 2003, the applicant was found guilty of wrongful use of cocaine (9 October 2003). The applicant was sentenced to reduction to PVT/E-1, forfeiture of $767 pay for one month and confinement for 30 days. Memorandum, Subject: Command Referred Mental Status Report, undated, reflects the applicant’s mental status was within normal limits, there was no evidence of significant treatable psychiatric illness, the applicant was responsible for applicant’s actions, had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, a negative finding for evidence of treatable psychiatric disorder, and further, the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; and NPRC Service Request All Details. 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 waivable and nonwaivable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends substance abuse, which led to the discharge, resulted from an attempt to self-medicate to cope with the applicant’s combat tour. Memorandum, Subject: Command Referred Mental Status Report, undated, reflects the applicant’s mental status was within normal limits, there was no evidence of significant treatable psychiatric illness, the applicant was responsible for applicant’s actions, had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, a negative finding for evidence of treatable psychiatric disorder, and further, the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The Mental Status memorandum was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge would allow veterans benefits. Eligibility for veteran’s benefits 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. 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 DoD and VA medical records, applicant submissions and third party statements, and found the applicant’s ADHD and Major Depression could potentially mitigate the applicant’s discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant’s ADHD and Major Depression existed during service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. After applying liberal consideration, the Board Medical Advisor opined that the applicant’s ADHD and Major Depression does not mitigate the applicant’s drug use as the applicant’s drug use is not part of the sequela of symptoms associated with Major Depression or ADHD. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the Board’s application of liberal consideration, the Board concurred with the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor, a voting member, and determined that the applicant’s ADHD and Major Depression does not outweighed the applicant’s unmitigated basis for separation – two incidents of cocaine use. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends substance abuse, which led to discharge, resulted from an attempt to self-medicate to cope with the applicant’s combat tour. The Board liberally considered this contention and determined that the applicant’s ADHD and Major Depression do not outweigh the applicant’s unmitigated drug use basis of separation. Therefore, the discharge is proper and equitable. (2) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge would allow veterans benefits. 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. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. The applicant has exhausted the applicant’s appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. 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 Board determined that the applicant’s ADHD and Major Depression did not outweigh the unmitigated basis for separation – two time cocaine use. The Board also considered the applicant’s contentions for purposes of equity, including the applicant’s more than four (4) years of service and combat deployment and determined that the totality of the applicant’s record does not warrant 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 GD was proper and equitable as the applicant’s misconduct fell below that level of meritorious service warranted for an upgrade to HD (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, as 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 AR20210003058 1