1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 March 2019 b. Date Received: 19 April 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 was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident. His service was excellent prior to his mishap. When the offense occurred he was going through a divorce and losing his kids. In a records review conducted on 23 July 2021, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (post-service diagnosis of PTSD). 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, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a corresponding separation code of JKN. 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 (AWOL) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c (1) / JKD / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 May 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 26 April 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant absented himself from his unit without authority from on or about 16 January 2018 to on or about 23 January 2018 and from on or about 26 February to on or about 7 March 2018. (3) Recommended Characterization: General, under honorable conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 30 April 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 7 May 2018 / General, under honorable conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 March 2016 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 91 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B, Infantryman / 4 years, 11 months, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 29 April 2013 - 15 March 2016 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 23 January 2016 - 28 June 2016 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, JSAM, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ACM- CS, ASR, NATO Medal, EIB, Air Assault Badge, Driver and Mechanic Badge-Driver-Wheeled Vehicle Clasp g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: On 24 April 2017, the Substance Disorder Clinical Care Department informed the applicant's commander that the applicant had not made satisfactory progress towards achieving the criteria for successful rehabilitation; further rehabilitation efforts in a military environment were not justified in light the applicant's lack of progress; and discharge from military service should be effective. Four Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 16 January 2018; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 23 January 2018; From "PDY," to "AWOL," effective 26 February 2018; and From "AWOL" to "PDT", effective 7 March 2018 FG Article 15, dated 13 April 2018, reflects the applicant absented himself from his unit on or about 16 January 2018 to on or about 23 January 2018 and from on or about 26 February 2018 to on or about 7 March 2018. The punishment consisted of reduction to private/E-1; forfeiture of $819.00 pay per month for 2 months; and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Multiple Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL X 2 for a total of 24 days 16 January 2018 - 22 January 2018 / Applicant returned 16 February 20118 - 6 March 2018 / Applicant returned j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: A Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 April 2018, reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and appreciate the difference between right and wrong. The applicant was psychologically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. The applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol misuse. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, DD Form 214, Recommendation for Award- 3, Permanent Orders 15317-029, dated 13 November 2015, Permanent Orders Number 073- 024, dated 14 March 2014, Narrative for JSAM, Citation for JSAM, Permanent Orders 077-020, dated 17 March 2016, Honorable Discharge Certificate, Oath of Reenlistment Certificate, Memo, Subject; Letter of Continuity for [Applicant], dated 13 April 2016. 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) 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(1) allows for an absentee returned to military control from a status of absent without leave or desertion to be separated for commission of a serious offense. 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 requests an upgrade to honorable. The record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By the misconduct (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident. A review of the applicant's record shows he was AWOL on two separate occasions. The applicant states his service was excellent prior to his mishap. 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 is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant also states when the offense occurred he was going through a divorce and was losing his kids. The applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. 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 applicant has been diagnosed with combat related PTSD which is a potentially mitigating condition within the purview of Liberal Consideration. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? YES. The VA has connected the applicant's diagnosis of PTSD to his military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? YES. As PTSD is associated with avoidant behaviors, there is a nexus between the applicant's diagnosis of PTSD and his two incidents of being absent without leave. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? YES. The applicant has been diagnosed with combat related PTSD which is a potentially mitigating condition within the purview of Liberal Consideration which warrants a discharge upgrade. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident. A review of the applicant's record shows he was AWOL on two separate occasions. (2) The applicant also states when the offense occurred he was going through a divorce and was losing his kids. The applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. c. The Board determined that the applicant's characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD mitigating the discharge. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant had a BH condition which mitigated at least part of the applicant's misconduct. (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 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: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) / JKN d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. 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 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 AR20190007937 1