1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 January 2021 b. Date Received: 27 January 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, was wrongfully discharged due to the circumstances. The applicant contends on many occasions seeking professional and mental service while enlisted. The applicant believes was not given the proper treatment for mental conditions and did not know at the time what was going on nor how to manage it. The applicant was off and on prescribed medications during and in between deployments that could have contributed to the fluctuation in the applicant's mood and disrupted the applicant's ability to make sound judgement. The applicant requests that the board please consider reviewing and upgrading the discharge because this has a huge hindrance to the applicant continuing and receiving the benefits the applicant needs for school, work, and the applicant's business. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 2 December 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD/MST fully outweighing the applicant's drug abuse. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 15, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF. 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: 25 August 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 June 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for having received a Field Grade Article 15 for wrongfully using marijuana on 16 September 2008, a Field Grade Article 15 for being absent without leave on 16 March 2009, and a Summary Court-Martial for assault on 29 April 2009. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 30 June 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: None (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 6 July 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 May 2005 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 89B10, Ammunition Specialist / 3 years, 9 months, 9 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 7 August 2008, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 54 during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing conducted on 30 July 2008. FG Article 15 dated 18 September 2008, for wrongfully using marijuana between 30 June 2008 and on or about 30 July 2008. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $673.oo pay per month for two months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. FG Article 15 dated 16 March 2009 for failing to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty x 2 on or about 10 February 2009, 24 February 2009, x 2 on or about 27 February 2009, and without authority absent from assigned unit on or about 19 February 2009 until on or about 20 February 2009. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $699.00 pay per month for two months and extra duty for 45 days (suspended). Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial dated 29 April 2009, for having on or about 29 March 2009, assaulted Sergeant Y.B., by pulling Y.B. by the hair and hitting about the head and shoulders with fists. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $999.00 pay and hard labor without confinement for 30 days. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 22 June 2009, which indicates the applicant was diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder. It was noted that the applicant's mental status was within normal limits with no suicidal or homicidal ideations. While the applicant met retention standard and there was no psychiatric disease or defect which warrant disposition through medical channels, the applicant met criteria for Adjustment Disorder. The applicant did not have a history of TBI's and did not meet criteria for PTSD. It was recommended that the applicant be allowed to continue to see BCT Behavioral Health as needed until separation was complete. The applicant met the medical retention requirements of Chapter 3, AR 40-501, and did not warrant disposition through medical channels. In other words, the applicant did not meet criteria for an MEB/PEB. The applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative/board proceedings, the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; physical profile / medical records for low back pain; chronological records of medical care; partial documents from separation packet; Atlanta VA Discharge Worksheet; Peach ford Behavioral Health System Patient Discharge Instructions, dated 22 January 2010; decision letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated 6 July 2018, indicates the applicant has been awarded 70 percent service connected disability for post traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder (which was previously rated as dysthymic disorder with depression). 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), dated 25 September 2019, 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. (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, paragraph 12c (2), 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's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) of service Indicates separation action was initiated against the applicant for having received a Field Grade Article 15 for wrongfully using marijuana, a Field Grade Article 15 for being absent without leave, and a Summary Court-Martial for assault. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c (2), AR 635-200 with a general (under 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." The applicant seeks relief contending, was wrongfully discharged due to the circumstances. The applicant contends on many occasions seeking professional and mental service while enlisted. The applicant believes was not given the proper treatment for mental conditions and did not know at the time what was going on nor how to manage it. The applicant was off and on prescribed medications during and in between deployments that could have contributed to the fluctuation in the applicant's mood and disrupted the applicant's ability to make sound judgement. The applicant's contentions were noted; evidence submitted by the applicant with her application from the Department of Veterans Affairs, indicates the applicant has been awarded 70 percent service-connected disability for post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder (which was previously rated as dysthymic disorder with depression). However, it should be noted the Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 22 June 2009, at the time of discharge indicates the applicant was diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder. It was noted that the applicant's mental status was within normal limits with no suicidal or homicidal ideations. While the applicant met retention standard and there was no psychiatric disease or defect which warrant disposition through medical channels, the applicant met criteria for Adjustment Disorder. The applicant did not have a history of TBI's and did not meet criteria for PTSD. It was recommended that the applicant be allowed to continue to see BCT Behavioral Health as needed until the applicant separation was complete. However, the applicant met the medical retention requirements of Chapter 3, AR 40-501, and did not warrant disposition through medical channels. In other words, the applicant did not meet criteria for an MEB/PEB. The applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative/board proceedings. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. It should also be noted; the service record indicates the applicant committed several discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of the applicant's service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the special trust and confidence placed in a Soldier. The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career that ultimately caused discharge from the Army. The applicant expressed a desire for an upgrade of the discharge because this has a huge hindrance to the applicant continuing and receiving the benefits needed for school, work, and the applicant's business. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, 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. 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 that the applicant has the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses/experiences: Adjustment Disorder, Adjustment DO with depressed mood, Adjustment DO with disturbance of emotions, Dysthymic Disorder, PTSD due to combat and MST. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the VA has established service connection for applicant's diagnosis of PTSD due to combat and MST and the various BH conditions were diagnosed in 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 as there is an association between PTSD/MST and avoidant behavior, there is a nexus between these conditions and the period of AWOL. As there is an association between PTSD/MST and self- medication with illicit substances, there is a nexus between these conditions and the applicant's wrongful use of marijuana. Finally, as the assault was directly related to the MST experience, there is medical mitigation for that misconduct as well. (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 related to MST fully outweighed the misconduct of drug abuse, AWOL, and assault for the aforementioned reasons b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant seeks relief contending being wrongfully discharged due to the circumstances and believes was not given the proper treatment for mental conditions and did not know at the time what was going on nor how to manage it. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant received BH assistance while in-service, but the circumstances surrounding the discharge, specifically the assault, were directly related to the MST/PTSD, thus were fully outweighed by this experience and condition. (2) The applicant contends being off and on prescribed medications during and in between deployments that could have contributed to the fluctuation in mood and disrupted the ability to make sound judgements. 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/MST fully outweighing the applicant's drug abuse, AWOL, and assault due to connection between these conditions and avoidance and self-medication behaviors and the direct link between the MST and the assault. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD/MST fully outweighing the applicant's 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/MST fully outweighed the applicant's misconduct of drug abuse, AWOL, and assault due to connections between the diagnoses and self-medication, avoidance behaviors as well as the assault's direct link to the MST experience. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority under the same pretexts, thus the reason for discharge is no longer appropriate. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JFF. (3) The RE code will not change, as the mitigating PTSD/MST is service-limiting. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Secretarial Authority / JFF d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 15 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 AR20210007995 1