1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 23 April 2020 b. Date Received: 12 May 2020 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, the discharge was not an error or injustice, the applicant deems it as the applicant's ignorance. The applicant's loss of family pushed the applicant's mental and physical ability. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 21 June 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression outweighing the applicant's pattern of misconduct. 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 code is 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 6 September 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 23 July 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between on or about 23 June 2011 and on or about 28 June 2011, the applicant wrongfully used amphetamine and methamphetamine; and on or about 27 January 2011, the applicant drove under the influence of alcohol. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 17 November 2011 / The applicant requested consideration of the case by an administrative separation board. On 1 May 2012, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation and advised of his rights. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 18 July 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 5 January 2007 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 40 / two-year college / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 18 years, 4 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 19 September 1985 - 29 June 1992 / HD USARCG, 30 June 1992 - 19 September 1994 / HD (Break in Service) ARNG, 1 February 2001 - 31 January 2003 / HD (Break in Service) RA, 4 January 2002 - 27 August 2002 / HD (ADT) ARNG, 4 October 2004 - 4 January 2007 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (8 October 2007 - 20 December 2008; Afghanistan (31 May 2010 - 3 June 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM-2, AAM-3, AGCM-3, NDSM-2, SWASM- 2BSS, GWOTSM, HSM, ICM-2CS, ASR, OSR-3, NATOMDL, KLM-SA, KLM-KU g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 28 July 2011, reflects the applicant was apprehended for driving under the influence of alcohol (off-post) on 27 January 2011. Applicant was administered a hand held intoxilyzer test by German Police with the result of .129 grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath. A subsequent report from German Police revealed applicant's BAC to be .180 grams of alcohol per 100 mil of blood. FG Article 15, dated 9 September 2011, for physically controlling a car while drunk on or about 27 January 2011. And for wrongfully using amphetamine and methamphetamine on or about 23 June 2011 and 28 June 2011. The punishment consisted of a reduction from E-4 to E-1; forfeiture of $733 pay per month for 2 months; and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 9 August 2011, reflects the applicant tested positive for DAMP 9266 (D-Amphetamine) and DMETH (D-Methamphetamine), during a Probable Cause (PO) urinalysis testing, conducted on 28 June 2011. Developmental Counseling Form, dated 26 September 2011, reflects the applicant was counseled for consideration for elimination from the U.S. Army. Two Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief, dated 19 October 2011, reflects the applicant was flagged for involuntary separation/field initiated (BA) effective 8 August 2011 and for adverse action (AA), effective 27 January 2011; was ineligible for reenlistment due to pending separation (9V). The Assignment Eligibility Availability (AEA) code reflects AEA code "L" which has no assignment restrictions. The applicant was reduced from E-4 to E-1 effective 9 September 2011. FLAGS / AEA codes: AA, BA / L RE/Prohibition code: 9V i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Veterans Affairs Disability rating decision, dated 24 September 2013, reflecting the applicant was rated 70 percent disability for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (now claimed as night sweats, nervousness, inability adapting to stress, previously claimed as PTSD, anxiety disorder, cognitive disorder-not otherwise specified, and depression- episodic) with an overall combined rating of 80 percent. (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Mental Status Evaluation (MSE), dated 29 September 2011, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with alcohol abuse and had previously scheduled follow up appointments with behavioral health and the alcohol substance abuse program, it was recommended that the applicant attend. From a mental health perspective, there was no contraindication for the applicant's unit proceeding with administrative action. Of note, the applicant has accessed Behavioral Health Services while on active duty. Upon possible separation from service, the applicant should be afforded the opportunity to access behavioral health services in the Veterans Administration. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; DD Form 214; Enlisted Record Brief; two NGB Forms 22; DA Form 1506; ARNG Retirements Points History Statement; VA Rating Decision letter; Ansbach Behavioral Health Clinic letter; one third-party letter. 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), 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. 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, pattern of misconduct. 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 waiverable and nonwaiverable 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 waiverable. 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 Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was not an error or injustice, the applicant deems it was the applicant's ignorance. The applicant's loss of family pushed the applicant's mental and physical ability. The applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, and there is no evidence in the record that the applicant ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. Ansbach Behavioral Health Clinic letter, dated 24 January 2017, states the applicant was accepted into an Intensive Outpatient Treatment for alcohol. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent, to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. 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. Additionally, the third party statement provided with the application speaks highly of the applicant. It recognizes the applicant's care for family while coping with PTSD. 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: Depression; Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the diagnoses of Depression and PTSD were made while applicant was on active duty. VA service connection for PTSD establishes it occurred/existed during service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that there is medical mitigation for the applicant's misconduct. As there is an association between Depression, PTSD and use of alcohol and/or illicit drugs to self-medicate painful emotional symptoms, there is a nexus between the diagnoses of Depression, PTSD and the wrongful use of amphetamine and methamphetamine. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the applicant's PTSD and Depression outweighed the applicant's illegal drug use. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant seeks relief contending the discharge was not an error or injustice, instead, the applicant deems it was the applicant's ignorance. The Board considered this contention and appreciates the applicant accepting responsibility for applicant's mistakes. Ultimately, the Board did not make a finding as to this contention due to a discharge being upgraded with the Board's determination that the applicant's misconduct was medically mitigated. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression outweighing the applicant's pattern of misconduct. 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 code is 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 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression outweighed the applicant's misconduct of drug abuse and driving under the influence of alcohol. 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 AR20200007348 1