1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 April 2020 b. Date Received: 21 April 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 and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, after becoming nondeployable the applicant was treated poorly. The applicant was screened for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) but was resistant to being honest because the applicant was trying to attend airborne school and Special Forces Selection. In March of 2012, the applicant screened positive for PTSD and a nightmare disorder. The applicant was prescribed medication for sleep and pain management, struggled with being late due to sleep medication. The applicant contends the struggle with mental health issues after a deployment impacted the applicant's career. The applicant had honorable service, including a combat tour. (Applicant's complete statement is available for the board's review) b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 29 March 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD/TBI mitigated the FTRs, disrespect, disobedience, and leaving place of duty as detailed in Section 9a of this document. 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. 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, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 October 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 30 August 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant failed to report to the appointed place duty on four separate occasions. The applicant was disrespectful to a noncommissioned officer on two separate occasions and disobeyed a noncommissioned officer on two separate occasions. Additionally, the applicant left the appointed place of duty. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 30 August 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 September 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 April 2010 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M10, Motor Transport / 3 years, 11 months, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 7 October 2008 - 13 April 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (1 February 2010 - 5 February 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-CS-2, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 31 May 2012, reflects the applicant left the appointed place of duty without authority on 16 May 2012 and the applicant failed to obey a lawful order on 14 May 2012. The punishment consisted of reduction to private/E-2; forfeiture of $250 pay per month for 2 months, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 27 November 2012; and extra duty 45 days. The suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $250 pay per month for 2months was vacated on 5 July 2012, due to the applicant failing to go to the appointed place of duty without authority on or about 18 June 2012. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: The applicant provides a VA Rating Decision, dated 30 November 2016, which reflects the applicant has an evaluation of PTSD with panic attacks (previously shown as any acquired psychiatric disorder to include PTSD), which was 70 percent disabling was increased to 100 percent effective 2 November 2016. The applicant also has a service connection for post-concussive headaches was granted with an evaluation of 30 percent effective 25 July 2016. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, DD Form 214, personal statement, VA Rating Decision, dated 30 November 2016, medical documents 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Noe 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 14-2b 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. 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), the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant requests the narrative reason for the discharge be changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is "JKA." Army Regulation 635-5, 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 contends after becoming nondeployable the applicant was treated poorly. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant sought assistance or reported the poor treatment The applicant contends the struggle with mental health issues after a deployment impacted the applicant's career. The applicant's AMHRR is void of a mental/behavioral health evaluation. The applicant provides a VA Rating Decision, dated 30 November 2016, which reflects the applicant has an evaluation of PTSD with panic attacks (previously shown as any acquired psychiatric disorder to include PTSD), which was 70 percent disabling was increased to 100 percent effective 2 November 2016. The applicant also has a service connection for post-concussive headaches was granted with an evaluation of 30 percent effective 25 July 2016 The applicant states there was honorable service, including a combat tour. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. 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; Anxiety DO; Nightmare DO; PTSD; TBI. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the diagnoses of Adjustment DO, Anxiety DO NOS, Nightmare DO, PTSD were made on active duty. 100% VA service-connection for PTSD (100%) and TBI (including post-concussive headaches - 10% and 30% service-connection, respectively) establish their occurrence was on active duty. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant has two mitigating BH conditions, PTSD and TBI (post-concussive headaches are subsumed under TBI). As both conditions are associated with problems with authority figures and avoidant behaviors, there is a nexus between these conditions and the applicant's offenses of disrespectfulness toward an NCO, disobeying an NCO and leaving appointed place of duty. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the applicant's PTSD/TBI outweighed the misconduct for the aforementioned reason(s). b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the struggle with mental health issues after a deployment impacted the applicant's career. 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 PTSD/TBI mitigated the misconduct as outlined in Section 9a, above. (2) The applicant contends after becoming nondeployable the applicant was treated poorly. The Board considered this contention of maltreatment during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's PTSD/TBI outweighing the misconduct. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD/TBI mitigated the FTRs, disrespect, disobedience, and leaving place of duty as detailed in Section 9a of this document. 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. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD/TBI mitigated the applicant's FTRs, disrespect, disobedience, and leaving place of duty as detailed in Section 9a of this document. 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 AR20200007367 1