1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 16 December 2019 b. Date Received: 31 December 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 under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, after returning from a deployment the applicant came back angry and stressed and the applicant's marriage and career were ruined. The applicant contends the trouble with the law occurred after a deployment. The applicant realized being absent without leave was wrong, so the applicant returned and became a part of the company and served honorably, but it was a lost cause, the applicant was separated. The applicant contends the military experience was psychologically taxing. The applicant desire to move on with life without the stain on the applicant's self-respect and dignity. The applicant reports being a law-abiding taxpayer and community activist. The applicant is also married and attending college. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 21 October 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI diagnosis and pending PTSD assessment). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 14 February 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): Charge Sheet, dated 13 October 2010, reflects the applicant was charged with being absent without authority on or about 11 October 2010 with intent to remain away permanently and did remain absent and on 11 September 2010, without authority, was absent from the unit with intent to remain absent and remained absent. Charge Sheet, dated 11 March 2015, reflects the applicant was absent from the unit without authority from on or about 11 March 2015 and with intent to stay away permanently and was absent from the unit without authority from on or about 10 March 2015, with the intent to stay away permanently. (2) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 25 January 2017 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 January 2008 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 117 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 13B10, Combat Engineer / 3 years, 7 months, 6 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (12 January 2009 - 19 December 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: MUC, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: See Charge Sheets as described in item 3c(1). i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL X 2002 days (11 September 2010 - 2 June 2014) Returned, (10 March 2015 - 11 December 2016) / Apprehended j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, Personal statement, Letters of support-9 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant reports being a law-abiding taxpayer and community activist. The applicant is also married and attending college. 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 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. (6) Paragraph 10-8a stipulates a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record during the current enlistment. (See chap 3, sec II). (7) Paragraph 10b stipulates Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper. (8) Chapter 15 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army's best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary's approved designee as announced in updated memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. 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 Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's service AMHRR is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. The applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 10, by reason of In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, with a characterization of service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The applicant contends after returning from a deployment the applicant came back angry and stressed and the applicant's marriage and career were ruined. The applicant's AMHRR is void of a mental stratus evaluation. The applicant contends the trouble with the law occurred after a deployment. The applicant realized being absent without leave was wrong, so the applicant returned and became a part of the company and served honorably, but it was a lost cause, the applicant was separated. The Board will consider the applicant service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends the military experience was psychologically taxing. The applicant's AMHRR is void of evidence pertaining to a mental health or other medical diagnosis. The applicant desire to move on with life without the stain on the applicant's self-respect and dignity. The applicant reports being a law-abiding taxpayer and community activist. The applicant is also married and attending college. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. No law or regulation provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life after leaving the service. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it is his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. 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 the following diagnoses or experiences which can, under certain circumstances, potentially mitigate or excuse misconduct leading to separation. The applicant was diagnosed with PTSD while deployed. Upon return, the applicant was diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder with pending assessment for PTSD and Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). The applicant is service connected for Psychosis. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant held a PTSD diagnosis in-service. (3) Does the condition or experience excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partial. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that due to the nexus between trauma and avoidance, PTSD mitigates the basis for separation. While not a part of the basis for separation, it is noted the prior disciplinary issues would be partially mitigated; drugs would be mitigated by trauma but not theft or assault. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the condition or experience outweighed the basis of separation, AWOL and drug use, but did not outweigh the additional misconduct of theft and assault. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the trouble with the law occurred after a deployment. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's OBHI and PTSD partially outweighing the applicant's basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends after returning from a deployment the applicant came back angry and stressed and the applicant's marriage and career were ruined. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's OBHI and PTSD partially outweighing the applicant's basis for separation. (3) The applicant contends the military experience was psychologically taxing. The Board determined this contention has validity. After review of the applicant's DOD and VA health records, it revealed the applicant was diagnosed in service with Major Depressive Disorder and PTSD. Therefore, in this case, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service based on partial medical mitigation. c. The Board determined the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI diagnosis and pending PTSD assessment). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions because the applicant length, quality and combat service in addition to the applicant's PTSD and OBHI partially mitigated the applicant's misconduct of AWOL and drug abuse, not theft or assault. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code, 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: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20200002497 1