1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 May 2019 b. Date Received: 20 June 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, he was having trouble sleeping and was diagnosed with insomnia. He believes his insomnia had a lot to do with his issues of making it to formation. In a records review conducted on 24 September 2021, 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 (OBHI and PTSD diagnoses), and prior period of honorable service. 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. 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 October 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 August 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed / and counseled for the following reasons: continuously failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the specified time; failing to report to formation in the incorrect uniform; making a false statement; and for failing to obey a lawful order. (3) Recommended Characterization: General, (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 14 August 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 August 2014 / General, (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 November 2010 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91B, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic / 5 years, 9 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 21 January 2009 - 9 November 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 19 June 2010 - 15 July 2011 f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS-2, ARCOM, NATO Medal, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, Driver and Mechanic Badge-Mechanic g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Memorandum, subject: Commander's Report, dated 8 August 2014, reflects the applicant received a CG Article 15 for 13 violations of Article 86, failure to report; absent without leave, and one violation of Article 107, false official statement. The Punishment consisted of reduction to PFC/E-3; forfeiture of $462.00 pay, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 24 March 2013; and extra duty for 7 days. On 22 July 2014, the applicant received a CG Article 15, for 10 violations of Article 86, failure to report; absent without leave; and one violation of Article 92, failure to obey order or regulation. The punishment consisted of reduction to PFC/E-3; and extra duty for 14 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, DD Form 214, Personal Note 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 14-12b 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 AMHRR record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant contends he was having trouble sleeping and was diagnosed with insomnia. He believes his insomnia had a lot to do with his issues of making to formation. The applicant's service record contains no evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition, nor does the applicant provide any evidence to support his contentions. 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 DoD and VA medical records and found the applicant has been diagnosed with Anxiety Disorder NOS by the military and PTSD related to military service by the VA. Both of these are potentially mitigating conditions under Liberal Consideration. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. Applicant has been diagnosed with Anxiety Disorder NOS by the military and PTSD related to military service by the VA. He is 70% service connected for PTSD by the VA. Service connection indicates that he suffered from PTSD while on active duty. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. As there is an is an association between PTSD and avoidant behaviors, there is a nexus between his PTSD and his multiple FTRs. As there is an association between PTSD and difficulty with authority figures, there is a nexus between his diagnosis of PTSD and his failure to obey an order. PTSD, however, does not mitigate making a false statement or failing to report in uniform. Behaviors such as these are not typical of PTSD in that they are not spontaneous, indicate motivation and do not recreate any aspects of the underlying trauma. (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 PTSD is often associated with avoidance behaviors and difficulty with authority. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the BH conditions outweighed the cause for separation due to the remaining unmitigated offenses being minor and mitigated by his combat service and quality of service. b. The applicant contends he was having trouble sleeping and was diagnosed with insomnia. He believes his insomnia had a lot to do with his issues of making to formation. The applicant's service record contains no evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition, nor does the applicant provide any evidence to support his contentions. Notwithstanding, the Board voted to grant relief based on partial mitigation by PTSD diagnosis. c. 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 (OBHI and PTSD diagnoses), and prior period of honorable service. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because PTSD mitigated the failure to obey, and the applicant's combat and quality of service partially mitigated the remaining offenses of uniform violation, false official statement, and FTR - relatively minor considering the entirety of the record. 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 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 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 AR20190009914 1