1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 March 2019 b. Date Received: 21 March 2019 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, his discharge is limiting his chances of getting a job and making his life better. He gave his all while serving in a difficult military occupational specialty (MOS). He tried to progress and become someone while serving on active duty. There are many people who can vouch for the type of Soldier he was. He is now going to school and staying out of trouble. In a records review conducted on 23 June 2021, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI 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 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. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 17 October 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 August 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant disobeyed a lawful order from a commissioned officer, made a false official statement to a non-commissioned officer, and failed to report to his place of duty for his Army Physical Fitness Test. (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 13 September 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 5 August 2014 / 3 years, 21 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 88 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 92G, Food Service Specialist / 2 years, 2 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG, Article 15, dated 13 October 2015, reflects the applicant, without authority, failed to go at the prescribed time to his appointed place of duty and with intent to deceive, make a false statement on or about 16 September 2015. The punishment consisted of reduction to private/E-1; forfeiture of $773.00 pay, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 17 February 2016; and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant record contains a Health Record, dated 11 May 2016, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, Personal statement, 5 Letters of support, G4S Acknowledgement and Consent Agreement, 2 Certificates of Completion, Certificate of Training Achievement, Conditional Job Offer, W-2, Transcript, Documents from Separation Packet to include medical documents, Authorization to Release Confidential Information. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states he is going to school and staying out of trouble. 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 Service member discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Service member'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 14-12b, addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends his discharge is limiting his chances of getting a job and making his life better. However, 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 The applicant contends he gave his all while serving in a difficult MOS. The third party statements provided with the application spoke highly of the applicant's performance. The authors recognized his good performance while in the Army and after separation; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. 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 arrived at this finding based upon the medical advisor's review of the Armed Forces Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV). The applicant held in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and PTSD related to an in-service attack. Records reflect the applicant filed a complaint resulting in a workplace investigation and removal of leadership. In response, the applicant and others posited the separation may have related to being a whistle blower. Post-service, the applicant is service connected for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) with an additional diagnosis of PTSD related to the in-service event. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? YES, The applicant had in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and PTSD. Medical records indicate the applicant's report of workplace difficulties was confirmed with removal of leadership. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially, while liberal consideration was applied, the trauma resulting in the PTSD diagnosis occurred after the misconduct. Accordingly, the applicant's PTSD diagnosis cannot be directly applied. In regards to the service connected MDD, difficulty with authority and making a false official statement are not characteristic of depression; however, failing to report could be related. Overall, the applicant's diagnoses do not mitigate the basis for separation (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? NO, since the possibly mitigating condition occurred after the misconduct, it does not outweigh the discharge. b. The ADRB determined that the applicant's characterization of service was inequitable based on statements in the record that indicate the applicant had improved dramatically since his misconduct and that members of his chain of command wanted to retain him. 5 letters of support from fellow service members and his current employer. c. Response to Contention - The third party statements provided with the application spoke highly of the applicant's performance. The authors recognized his good performance while in the Army and after separation; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. d. Response to Contention - The applicant contends he gave his all while serving in a difficult MOS. The record appears to show the applicant did give his all after the misconduct. e. Response to Contention - his discharge is limiting his chances of getting a job and making his life better. 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 f. Rationale for Decision: (1) The board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service because of his length and quality of service. (2) The board voted to change the reason to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), because while the misconduct did occur it was minor. (3) Because the characterization and reason were changed, the SPD code will change to JKN. The SPD code will not change as RE-3 is the proper code for a Minor Misconduct separation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 NA - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Reentry 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 AR20190005556 5