1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 23 February 2021 b. Date Received: 1 March 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, that an upgrade of the discharge is for education entitlements. The applicant contends that he was separated from the Army due to an alcohol abuse problem he had in 2012 while in the Warrior Transition Unit in Alaska. The applicant substance abuse issue stemmed from issues the applicant had with the previous unit of which the applicant had to be separated from due to death threats because the applicant testified in the Murder Trial of another Soldier in Afghanistan. The applicant contends during this ordeal he was struggling with depression and anxiety from not being able to have any contact with his friends in the previous unit and not being able to see his family as part of the applicant recovery from TBI which is one of the applicant service-connected disabilities. The applicant is in no way making excuses for his actions but, these actions were a result of what the applicant believes was a failure by himself and the Army of getting the real help the applicant needed during recovery. Since the applicant separation, he has maintained a healthy life for the most part and graduated with an associate degree and currently is trying to achieve his bachelor's degree. The applicant has stayed away from drugs completely since separation and has never had trouble with the law. The applicant believes, his rehabilitation is only missing his character discharge from a time the applicant made mistakes while trying to cope with his problems. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 9 December 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (MST, OBHI, TBI and PTSD diagnoses), and post-service accomplishments. 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: 15 March 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: Partial separation document submitted by the applicant with the application indicates that the separation authority having reviewed the applicant separation packet and the findings and the completed Medical Evaluation Board of the applicant in accordance with AR 635-200, paragraph 1-33(c), find that the applicant's disability was not the cause or substantial contributing cause of the applicant's misconduct and no other circumstance warrant disability proceeding instead of alternate administrative separation. It was directed that the applicant's case not-be processed through medical disability channels. After careful consideration of all matters, it was directed that the applicant be separated from the United States Army prior to the expiration of his term of service, under the provision of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (2) with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 June 2010 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 9 months, 1 day d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (dates not noted in AMHRR or on DD Form 214) f. Awards and Decorations: PH, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF; however, the decision letter submitted by the applicant with the application from the Department of Veterans Affairs indicates the applicant has been awarded 80 percent service-connected disability; (70 percent for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with traumatic brain injury and insomnia). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Department of Veterans Affairs decision letter; in-service medical records; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contend since his separation he has maintained a healthy life for the most part and graduated with an associate degree and currently is trying to achieve his bachelor's degree. 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 available AMHRR of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's AMHRR is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's AMHRR does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), by reason of misconduct (drug abuse), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that an upgrade of the discharge is for education entitlements. The applicant contends that he was separated from the Army due to an alcohol abuse problem he had in 2012 while in the Warrior Transition Unit in Alaska. The applicant substance abuse issue stemmed from issues the applicant had with the previous unit of which the applicant had to be separated from due to death threats because the applicant testified in the Murder Trial of another Soldier in Afghanistan. The applicant contends during this ordeal he was struggling with depression and anxiety from not being able to have any contact with his friends in the previous unit and not being able to see his family as part of the applicant recovery from TBI which is one of the applicant service-connected disabilities. The applicant is in no way making excuses for his actions but, these actions were a result of what the applicant believes was a failure by himself and the Army of getting the real help the applicant needed during recovery. Since the applicant separation, he has maintained a healthy life for the most part and graduated with an associate degree and currently is trying to achieve his bachelor's degree. The applicant has stayed away from drugs completely since separation and has never had trouble with the law. The applicant believes, his rehabilitation is only missing his character discharge from a time the applicant made mistakes while trying to cope with his problems. Evidence submitted by the applicant from the Department of Veterans Affairs indicating the applicant has been awarded 80 percent service-connected disability; (70 percent for post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with traumatic brain injury and insomnia) was noted. However, the merit of these contentions cannot be established because the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the complete discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet this burden of proof since the complete discharge packet is not available in the official record. The applicant expressed a desire for an upgrade of the discharge for education entitlements. However, 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: PTSD; Adjustment DO; TBI; Depression. VA: PTSD (70%SC); TBI (40%SC). Additionally, the applicant asserts MST, which may be sufficient evidence to establish the existence of a condition that could mitigate or excuse the discharge. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found PTSD; Adjustment DO; TBI; Depression were all diagnosed when he was in the military. MST was documented in both military and VA records. VA has established service connection for PTSD and TBI. (3) Does the condition or experience excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant has two mitigating BH conditions, PTSD and TBI and one mitigating experience, MST. As all three of these conditions are associated with the use of illicit drugs and/or alcohol to self-medicate painful emotional symptoms, there is a nexus between these three diagnoses and the applicant's wrongful use of marijuana. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the condition or experience outweighed the basis of separation. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant seeks relief contending, that he was separated from the Army due to an alcohol abuse problem he had in 2012 while in the Warrior Transition Unit in Alaska. The Board reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records and found that the applicant had BH diagnoses that fully mitigated the basis of separation. c. The Board determined in a records review conducted on 9 December 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (MST, OBHI, TBI and PTSD diagnoses), and post-service accomplishments. 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. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD, TBI and MST mitigated the applicant's misconduct of drug abuse. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to 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. (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: 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 AR20210012789 1