1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 23 July 2019 b. Date Received: 30 July 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, the discharge is factually incorrect. He was never a deserter; he was a Conscientious Objector. He became disillusioned with the reasoning for being at war and realized he didn't have the ability to take another life. He went to his commander and requested to be discharged as a Conscientious Objector and his commander agreed. He was absent without leave (AWOL) at his first duty station due to errors in his pay. In a records review conducted on 26 January 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 26 and 28, contain erroneous entries. The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ b. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) 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: 14 April 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 March 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant was AWOL between on or about 15 May 2008 and returned on or about 20 May 2008; and on or about 24 October 2008. Also, the applicant failed to follow a lawful order and was disrespectful in language towards a noncommissioned officer on or about 24 October 2008. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 March 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 17 March 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 October 2007 / 4 years, 23 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / Test-Based Diploma / 119 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist / 1 year, 6 months, 6 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 26 June 2008, reflects the applicant was absent without authority (AWOL) from on or about 15 May 2008 to on or about 20 May 2008. The punishment consisted of reduction to Private/E-1; forfeiture of $314 pay, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or before 24 September 2008; and extra duty for 14 days. CG Article 15, dated 15 December 2008, reflects the applicant failed to go to the prescribed appointed place of duty on or about 24 October 2008. The punishment consisted of reduction to Private/E-1; forfeiture of $314 pay per month for one month, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 15 March 2009; and extra duty for 14 days. A Mental Status Evaluation, dated 15 January 2009, reflects the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings. The applicant was mentally responsible and could distinguish right from wrong. The applicant was counseled on multiple occasions for various forms of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL X 5 days (15 May 2008 - 19 May 2008) / Returned to his unit. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, Personal Statement, DD Form 214 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 states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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'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 the discharge is factually incorrect. He was never a deserter; he was a Conscientious Objector. He went to his commander and requested to be discharged as a Conscientious Objector and his commander agreed. The applicant contends he was absent without leave at his first duty station due to errors in his pay. 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. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c (1), Misconduct (AWOL). The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense), with a General (Under Honorable Conditions). AR 635-200, paragraph14-12c, Soldiers processed for misconduct under this provisions will be assigned a Narrative Reason for Separation as Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) and a SPD code of JKQ. 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? No. The Board's Medical Advisor reviewed DoD and VA medical records and found no mitigating BH diagnoses on the applicant. The applicant provided no documents or testimony of a condition or experience, that, when applying liberal consideration, could have excused or mitigated a discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? N/A (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? N/A (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends the discharge is factually incorrect. The applicant contends not being a deserter, but a Conscientious Objector. The Board determined that the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to counter the basis for separation or mitigating circumstances for the Board to consider. The separation file in the AMHRR indicates that the applicant consulted with legal counsel, and the Board determined the command did not act in an arbitrary or capricious manner. (2) The applicant contends the was AWOL due to errors in his pay. The Board determined that the Army had many legitimate avenues available to service members requesting assistance with pay issues. There is no evidence in the official records nor provided by the applicant that such assistance was pursued. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant's contentions that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant's characterization of service because there were no mitigating factors for the Board to consider, as the applicant was discharged for AWOL, failure to follow an order, and disrespect to a noncommissioned officer, General (Under Honorable Conditions is proper and equitable. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. (2) The Board voted to change the applicant's reason for discharge because, although the Board found the discharge proper and equitable and there were no BH diagnoses which mitigated the misconduct to warrant relief, it was found that there was an administrative error on the applicant's DD Form 214, thus making the current reason for discharge improper. The corrected reason for discharge will be Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense). The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JKQ. (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 / Separation Order: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense) / JKQ d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Para 14-12C 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 AR20190011945 5