1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 30 August 2019 b. Date Received: 11 September 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable or general (under honorable conditions) and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that applicant was in the chapter process for almost two years. It sucked because the whole-time the applicant was flagged and couldn’t participate in any schools or get any awards. From the time of the start of the chapter to applicant’s last day as a Solder, applicant still maintained morale and stuck to the ethics of which applicant was taught. It has been a long journey, and applicant is proud to say they have endured this unfortunate turn of events but really wishes that applicant’s career could have been salvaged. In a records review conducted on 6 May 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 14 February 2019 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 January 2019 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for on or about 8 January 2018, violating a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 9-3, Fort Campbell (CAM) Regulation 190-1, dated 1 June 2013, by wrongfully possessing an unregistered firearm on the Fort Campbell Military Reservation; With intent to deceive, made to SSG D. A., an official statement, to wit: submitting a DD Form 789 Individual Sick Slip, which record was false in that the applicant was not given quarters, and was then known by the applicant to be false; and On or about 22 January 2018, the applicant wrongfully possessed 2.51 grams of Marijuana, a Schedule 1 controlled substance (3) Recommended Characterization: On 11 and 25 January 2019, the intermediate commanders recommended a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 November 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 7 November 2018, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 6 February 2019 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 July 2014 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / HS Graduate / 111 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88N10, Transportation Management Coordinator / 4 years, 7 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 23 March 2017, for failing to disobey a lawful order from a commissioned officer, dated 25 January 2017, by wrongfully failing to remain 1,000 feet away from the residence of K.P.S. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $512.00 pay (suspended) and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Military Police Report, dated 10 October 2017, indicated the applicant was the subject of investigation for Assault and Damage to Private Property. Military Police Report, dated 22 October 2017, indicates the applicant was the subject of investigation for Assault. Article 15, dated 13 December 2017, for unlawfully striking applicant’s spouse by pushing spouse to the ground, smashing spouse head on the ground, choking spouse by the neck and with hand on 4 October 2017 unlawfully striking spouse K.P.S., by pushing spouse and using a t-shirt to restrain on 12 October 2017, assaulting E.P.D., by wrapping applicant’s arm around E.P.E.D torso, in violation of Article 128 on 16 April 2017, wrongfully communicating to spouse K.P.S., a threat to push spouse off the apartment balcony, such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed force and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces in violation of Article 134, 6 October 2017, and wrongfully communicating to H.M., a threat to harm applicant’s spouse K.P.S., to wit: “I going to put my hands on her” or words to that effect, such conduct being prejudicial such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces and being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, which was in violation of Article 134, UCMJ, 4 October 2017. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $799.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), and extra duty for 45 days. Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial, dated 16 November 2018, indicates the applicant was sentenced to forfeiture of 2/3 pay per month for one month and confinement for 14 days. Offer to Plead Guilty at a Summary Court-Martial, dated 18 October 2018, indicates the applicant was charged with three specification of charges. The applicant understood that the offer and agreement could not be used against applicant in the determination of applicant’s guilt on any matters arising from the charge pending against applicant at a court-martial. Charge Sheet, dated 7 August 2018, which charged the applicant with violation of Article 92, a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 9-3, Fort Campbell (CAM) Regulation 190-1, dated 1 June 2013: by wrongfully possessing an unregistered firearm on the Fort Campbell Military Reservation; violation of Article 107, with intent to deceive, made to SSG D.A., and official statement, to wit: submitting a DA Form 789 Individual Sick Slip, which record was false in that the applicant was not given quarters and was not then known by the applicant to be so false on 10 April 2018; and violation of Article 112a, by on 22 January 2018, wrongfully possessed 2.51 grams of marijuana, a Schedule 1 controlled substance; and wrongfully using marijuana between 8 May 2018 and 8 June 2018. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 30 November 2018, which indicates the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and appreciate the differences between right and wrong. IAW AR40-501 the applicant met medical retention standards and was therefore cleared from a behavioral health perspective for administrative actions. It was also noted that the applicant presented symptoms of depression, but symptoms met medical retention standards. The applicant denied any history of military sexual trauma, symptoms of PTSD, and did not met criteria for a substance use disorder. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; several character reference letters; Department of Behavioral Health/Family Advocacy Program Memorandum; documents from Blanch-Field Army Community Hospital; Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 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, 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. e. 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 waivable and nonwaivable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. f. 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 “JKQ” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, misconduct (serious offense). 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 or general (under honorable conditions) and a narrative reason change. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. Evidence in the AMHRR indicates separation action was initiated against the applicant for on or about 8 January 2018, violating a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully possessing an unregistered firearm on the Fort Campbell Military Reservation; making an official statement, by submitting a DD Form 789 Individual Sick Slip, which record was false in that applicant was not given quarters; and for wrongfully possessing 2.51 grams of Marijuana, a Schedule 1 controlled substance. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635- 200 with a under other than honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is “Misconduct (Serious Offense),” and the separation code is “JKQ.” Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Documents, governs the preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant seeks relief contending that applicant was in the chapter process for almost two years. It sucked because the whole-time applicant was flagged and couldn’t participate in any schools or get any awards. From the time of the start of applicant’s chapter to applicant’s last day as a Solder, maintained applicant’s morale and stuck to the ethics of which applicant was taught. It has been a long journey, and applicant is proud to have endured this unfortunate turn of events but really wishes that applicant’s career could have been salvaged. The applicant contentions were noted; however, the service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of applicant’s service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support applicant was unjustly separated at the time of discharge. 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, applicant submissions and third-party statements, and found the applicant was diagnosed with TBI, Adjustment Disorder (DO), Generalized Anxiety DO and Intimate Partner Violence (IPV), which, in the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor, after applying liberal consideration, could potentially mitigate a discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the diagnoses of TBI, IPV and Adjustment DO were made while applicant was in the service. The VA has service connected the applicant for Generalized Anxiety DO and TBI. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor opined the applicant’s various acts of domestic violence are partially mitigated by IPV. Being the victim of IPV, however, does not mitigate the remaining offenses (possessing a firearm, forged sick slip, possession of marijuana) given that IPV does not affect one’s ability to distinguish right from wrong. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the Board’s application of liberal consideration, the Board considered the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that any of the applicant’s medical conditions of TBI, Adjustment Disorder (DO), Generalized Anxiety DO and IPV completely outweighed the basis for applicant’s separation – possessing a firearm, forged sick slip, possession of marijuana, and various acts of domestic violence. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant seeks relief contending being in the chapter process for almost two years. The Board considered this contention during proceedings and determined that this contention alone did not outweigh the basis of separation due to the severity of the offenses– possessing a firearm, forged sick slip, possession of marijuana, and various acts of domestic violence. 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 contention(s) 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, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant’s TBI, Adjustment Disorder (DO), Generalized Anxiety DO and IPV did not excuse or mitigate the offenses of possessing a firearm, forged sick slip, possession of marijuana, and various acts of domestic violence. 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 not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (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: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: 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 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 AR20190012074 1