1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 7 November 2019 b. Date Received: 12 November 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant's Requests and Issues: 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, an upgrade of the discharge is requested for the purpose of receiving full benefits for school, because at the prior duty station it was very stressful, and a lot of things happen. The applicant was going through family problems and Fort Irwin made it harder due to leadership. The applicant was a good Soldier who was going through mental issues at the time and did not get treated fairly. The applicant wants to do law enforcement or maybe border patrol, but first school. The applicant was drinking due to too much stress and took the Army substance abuse program and got help. The applicant received the Army Achievement Medal and attended Combat Life Saver and was not having serious misconduct as shown on the DD Form 214, the applicant was just going through a lot and had bad leadership. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 27 July 2022, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD diagnosis). 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. The Board determined the reentry eligibility (RE) code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 20 April 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 March 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for violating a lawful general order on 18 August 2017; failing to be at the prescribed place of duty on or about 14 December 2017; and overindulging in intoxicating liquor or drugs on or about 14 December 2017. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 March 2018 / The applicant waived legal counsel, however, a CPL / Army, TDS / NCOIC signed the document on 13 March 2018. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 March 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 February 2017 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 3 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 29 December 2014 to 14 February 2017 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, AGCM, NDSM g. Performance Ratings: None. h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 23 January 2018, for failing to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty on 14 December 2017, and because of wrongful previous of overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or drugs, incapacitated for the proper performance of duties, and being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces on 14 December 2017. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $1,026.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended), and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation dated 20 February 2018, which indicated the applicant met medical retention standards and was cleared for administrative action. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Combat Lifesaver Certificate of Training; Prime for Life Certificate; and a recommendation for an award. 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 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). f. 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. 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. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends the narrative reason should not have been serious misconduct as shown on the DD Form 214. The applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) of service indicates separation action was initiated against the applicant for violating a lawful general order on 18 August 2017; failing to be at the prescribed place of duty on or about 14 December 2017; and overindulging in intoxicating liquor or drugs on or about 14 December 2017. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general (under 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." The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, an upgrade of the discharge is requested for the purpose of receiving full benefits for school, because at the prior duty station it was very stressful, and a lot of things happen. The applicant was going through family problems and Fort Irwin made it harder due to leadership. The applicant was a good Soldier who was going through mental issues at the time and did not get treated fairly. The applicant wants to do law enforcement or maybe border patrol, but first school. The applicant was drinking due to too much stress and took the Army substance abuse program and got help. The applicant received the Army Achievement Medal and attended Combat Life Saver and was not having serious misconduct as shown on the DD Form 214, the applicant was just going through a lot and had bad leadership. The applicant contends that the prior duty station was very stressful, and a lot of things happen at the time of discharge; and the applicant was going through family problems and Fort Irwin made it harder due to leadership and was a good Soldier and did not get treated fairly. While the applicant may believe the stress at work was the underlying cause of the misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that the applicant sought relief from stress through the chain of command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. Additionally, the AMHRR 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 service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant expressed a desire for an upgrade to the discharge for the purpose of receiving full benefit for school. However, 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. 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 the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has the following potentially mitigating diagnoses/experiences: Adjustment Disorder and PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant held an in-service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder and initially service connected for Adjustment Disorder. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that irrespective of this medical advisor's opinion the applicant did not have PTSD or related symptoms in- service, based on liberal consideration the current VA service connection has to be accepted at face value and applied. Accordingly, the applicant's basis for separation is partially mitigated, FTR and overindulging in liquor or drugs due to the nexus between trauma and difficulty with authority and substance use. (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 the applicant's Adjustment Disorder and PTSD outweighed the basis for applicant's separation - violating a lawful general order, FTR, and overindulging in intoxicating liquor or drugs. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason should be changed. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to applicant's quality and length of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, to include applicant's PTSD diagnosis outweighing the applicant's violation of a lawful general order, FTR, and overindulging in intoxicating liquor or drugs basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends an upgrade would allow the applicant to receive full benefits for school. The Board determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do 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. (3) The applicant contend that the prior duty station was very stressful, and a lot of things happen at the time of discharge; and the applicant was going through family problems and Fort Irwin made it harder due to leadership and was a good Soldier and did not get treated fairly. The Board considered this contention and determined an upgrade is warranted based on the applicant's quality and length of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, to include applicant's PTSD diagnosis outweighing the discharge. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD diagnosis). 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. The Board determined the reentry eligibility (RE) code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's quality and length of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD diagnosis) outweighed the applicant's misconduct of violating a lawful general order, FTR, and overindulging in intoxicating liquor or drugs. 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 AR20200001225 1