1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 September 2020 b. Date Received: 13 October 2020 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to general (under honorable conditions) a change to the separation code, RE code and narrative reason for separation. Counsel for the applicant requests character of service be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions), for the separation authority to be changed from AR 635-200, Para 14-12c (2) to AR 635-200, Para 5-3 (the separation authority for Secretarial Plenary Authority), for his separation code to be changed from JKK to JFF, or another code commensurate with a Secretarial Plenary Authority Separation and his RE code changed from RE - 4 to RE - 1 or RE - 2. After enlisting in the Army in January of 2004, the applicant spent first assignment at Fort Bragg. The applicant attended Dental Lab Technician School in Wichita Falls, TX and finally served at Fort Irwin CA. The eleven medals the applicant earned demonstrated he was a high-performing Soldier and junior noncommissioned officer. On 30 June 2012, the applicant experienced a personal tragedy that deeply affected state of mind and challenged coping ability. A childhood friend drowned trying to save a child who had fallen in the water while their families were on an outing together. The applicant became overwhelmed with guilt following the accident of that friend's death and began to drink heavily in an effort to ease the pain. Sometime later, the applicant was offered cocaine and took it. Since discharge, the applicant has done everything possible to recover from that mistake - being devoted to family and has stayed continuously employed. The applicant has also taken all the steps to pursue personal education and career development. The applicant says that the discharge has made it impossible to go beyond the proverbial ceiling and is impairing career and ability to provide for family and help community in the most productive way possible. The applicant is trying to become a youth counselor and the current characterization is hindering the realization of this dream. The OTH discharge characterization is unfair because of its devastating, permanent impact compared to the nature of the applicant's misconduct. The applicant feels it leads to a life sentence of substandard employment for a one-time mistake precipitated by a trauma after so many years of honorable service. Given that LTG M. supports the applicant's request for relief, not a single person responsible for the applicant during the period of service now believes that the OTH discharge characterization is equitable. Furthermore, there is not a single additional thing the applicant could have done over the past seven years to demonstrate rehabilitation. The applicant is a devoted parent of four who wants nothing more than to help others. In a records review conducted on 25 February 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to the circumstances surrounding the discharge (one-time drug use), and prior period of honorable service, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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, Chapter 14-12c(2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 5 September 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 23 January 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: For misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs. Between on or about 31 August 2012 and on or about 4 September 2012, wrongfully used cocaine. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 April 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 9 April 2013, the applicant conditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board, contingent upon receiving a suspension of separation for a term of 6 months and a characterization of separation no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions). On 26 April 2013, the applicant's conditional waiver was disapproved and the appointed board of members, under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 2, paragraph 2-7, and AR 15-6, Chapter 5 on 1 February 2013, were directed to determine whether the applicant should be separated from the United States Army under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2), Misconduct-Abuse of Illegal Drugs. On 8 May 2013, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of rights. On 23 May 2013, the administrative separation board convened and found that the applicant did engage in the conduct stated above. The board recommended the applicant be separated with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. On 29 May 2013, the applicant submitted additional maters for consideration. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 June 2013 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 5 January 2012 / 2 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 120 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 68E10, Dental Specialist / 9 years, 7 month, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA- 28 January 2004 - 29 January 2009 / HD RA- 30 January 2009 - 4 January 2012 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM-7, GCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR, COA-5 g. Performance Ratings: 05 January 2012 - 13 August 2012 / Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 December 2012, 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. The applicant met medical retention requirements meaning did not qualify for a Medical Evaluation Board. FG Article 15, dated 22 October 2012, for wrongfully using cocaine (between 31 August 2012 and 4 September 2012). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4 and a written reprimand. Letter of Reprimand-undated, for wrongfully using cocaine. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Legal Brief with ten listed enclosures; Enlisted Records Brief; Case Separation Packet; Copies of Personnel Records; College Transcript; DD Form 214; Department of Veterans Affairs Decision Letter. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant was granted an Associate of Arts degree and is currently pursuing a Bachelor's Degree in Biblical Studies. 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) Paragraph 3-7c states Under other-than-honorable-conditions discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable and it may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial based on certain circumstances or patterns of behavior or acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. (5) 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. (6) 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. (7) 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-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 general (under honorable conditions). 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 should be changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c (2), AR 635-200 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Drug Abuse)," and the separation code is "JKK." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs the preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends the separation code (SPD) should be changed. Separation codes are three-character alphabetic combinations that identify reasons for, and types of, separation from active duty. The primary purpose of SPD codes is to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation. They are intended exclusively for the internal use of DoD and the Military Services to assist in the collection and analysis of separation data. SPD Codes are controlled by OSD and then implemented in Army policy AR 635-5-1 to track types of separations the SPD code specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c (2), is "JKK." The applicant requests a reentry eligibility (RE) code change. The applicant contends the death of a close family friend affected behavior and ultimately caused 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. The applicant contends having good service. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. 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 has obtained employment, is pursuing a Bachelor's degree and volunteers in the community. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post- service factors in the re-characterization 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. The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow better employment. However, relief is not granted solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities, it is based on the merits of the applicant's case. 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 and determined that the applicant more likely than not met DSM-V criteria for a diagnosis of Unspecified Trauma/Stressor-Related Disorder (F43.9). (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant developed condition of Unspecified Trauma/Stressor- Related Disorder while on active duty. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. It is the opinion of the Agency BH Advisor that the applicant has a mitigating BH condition. The applicant contends that the drug use was due to guilt felt after the drowning death of a friend for which the applicant took the blame. The applicant's medical records support. During the separation MSE, the applicant indicated having issues with insomnia, increased startle and possible paranoia after said friend drowned. While not diagnostic of PTSD, these symptoms and the applicant's history indicate it is more likely than not that the applicant was suffering from a trauma-related condition (Unspecified Trauma/Stressor-Related Disorder) at the time of the illicit drug use. As there is an association between Unspecified Trauma/Stressor-Related Disorder and use of illicit drugs to self-medicate, there is a nexus between applicant's trauma-related condition and the wrongful use of cocaine, thus the basis for separation is mitigated. (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, that the Trauma- related disorder the applicant had fully outweighed the one-time drug use for the reasons listed in (3) above. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the BH conditions outweighed the basis for separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the death of a close family friend affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. The Board determined that the applicant had a trauma-related disorder which mitigated the applicant's drug use - thus relief is warranted. (2) The applicant contends good service. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings. (3) The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. The Board determined that even without the mitigation of the applicant BH condition, the discharge would have been too harsh for a one-time use. (4) The applicant contends obtaining employment, pursuing Bachelor's degree and volunteering in the community. 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 BH condition fully outweighing the applicant's drug use basis for separation. (5) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. c. The Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to the circumstances surrounding the discharge (one-time drug use), and prior period of honorable service, and as a result it is inequitable. 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 to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's trauma-disorder mitigated the applicant's misconduct of cocaine use. 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 a. 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 AR20210005205 1