1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 May 2020 b. Date Received: 9 June 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, although being happy to return from a deployment in Afghanistan, the applicant had anxiety, depression, and anger issues. The applicant went AWOL for 29 (sic) days to find a safe and comfortable place to cope with the constant fight, internally. The applicant surrendered, knowing it was the right thing to do. The applicant had not been treated for the PTSD issues. While assigned to the Fort Drum 10th Mountain Division, the applicant deployed and spent nine months attached to a Special Forces unit. The applicant experienced daily conflict, if not on a weekly basis against the Al-Qaeda; participated in casualty evacuation; assisted with a Tracheostomy resulting from a shotgun wound to the face, while under small arms fire; stitched locals' wounds ranging from children to adults; and assisted with chest tube and treating many wounds. The applicant's job on the FOB was to assist and perform in the medical shed, performed as sergeant of the guard for Operations Mountain Storm and Viper, under Task Force Courage, and assisted with Special Forces missions. The applicant performed numerous patrols around the "deh rawood" area and encountered daily RPG attacks and small arms fire at the FOB. The applicant received awards and certificates of achievement during the deployment, was promoted to sergeant, and won the Soldier of the Quarter. A couple of months after redeploying, the applicant noticed something different internally. The applicant started having arguments with the spouse with anger outbursts, hypervigilance, anxiety, panic attacks, and depression. The applicant thought they resulted from being stationed at Fort Drum and decided to reenlist for Fort Bliss. Shortly after arriving at Fort Bliss, things started to get worse. All the symptoms heightened, with being unable to sleep and the applicant had no idea what to do. Regrettably, the applicant went AWOL after six months, but upon realizing it was a mistake, returned after 28 (sic) days of AWOL. The applicant received an Article 15 punishment and was discharged. When seeking help at the VA, the applicant was diagnosed with a severe PTSD resulting from the deployment. The applicant received 50 percent disability, which was increased to 70 percent. The applicant received multiple awards, including an AGCM, ARCOM, and AAM, and was an exemplary Soldier until the AWOL incident. The applicant sought help at Fort Bliss, but to no avail. As PTSD was the reason for the AWOL, the applicant never had any other issues while serving proudly. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 21 April 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD mitigating the accepted basis for applicant's separation - AWOL. Accordingly, 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 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, Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 25 July 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 June 2004 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / High School Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 92G10, Food Service Specialist / 3 years, 10 months, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 13 June 2001 - 13 June 2004 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (31 July 2003 - 14 May 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM, GWOTSM, AFEM, ASR The applicant's AMHRR reflects award of the OSR, however, the award is not reflected on the DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: April 2004 - June 2004 / Fully Capable July 2004 - April 2005 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), dated 11 May 2005, reflects the applicant was flagged for Adverse Action (AA), effective 22 March 2005; was eligible for immediate reenlistment (10). The Assignment Eligibility Availability code reflects the applicant was permanently ineligible. The ERB did not reflect any reduction in grade. The applicant's DD Form 214 reflects the applicant had completed the first full term of service. The applicant was discharged under the authority of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, with a narrative reason of Misconduct. The DD Form 214 was authenticated with the applicant's signature. The applicant had lost time for the period 22 March to 28 April 2005. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 38 days (AWOL 22 March 2005 - 28 April 2005) / The applicant returned to the unit. j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; two NCOERs; ARCOM certificate; AGCM Orders; Promotion Orders; and VA Summary of Benefits 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 14-12c prescribes 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 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's Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR) is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. The applicant's AMHRR does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. The applicant's DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). The applicant contends having to experience an internal conflict with anxiety, depression, and anger issues after redeployment, including having arguments with the spouse with anger outburst, hypervigilance, anxiety, panic attacks, and depression, which VA diagnosed as severe PTSD. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement and VA summary of benefits letter showing a 70 percent evaluation for service-connected disability, which does not provide any diagnosis, to support the contention the discharge resulted from any medical condition. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be the applicant's responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet and a behavioral health or PTSD diagnosis by a competent medical authority) 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. The applicant contends having received multiple awards, certificates of achievement during deployment, including an AGCM, ARCOM, and AAM; being promoted to sergeant; winning the Soldier of the Quarter recognition; and was an exemplary Soldier until the AWOL incident. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends having sought help at Fort Bliss, but to no avail, went AWOL. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. 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: PTSD (70% service-connected). (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found VA service connection establishes the applicant's PTSD condition began during military 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 the applicant has a mitigating BH condition, PTSD. As there is an association between PTSD and avoidant behavior, there is a nexus between PTSD and the applicant's period of AWOL. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the condition or experience outweighed the accepted basis of separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends having to experience an internal conflict with anxiety, depression, and anger issues after redeployment, including having arguments with the spouse with anger outburst, hypervigilance, anxiety, panic attacks, and depression, which VA diagnosed as severe PTSD. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade based on the applicant's PTSD mitigating the accepted basis for applicant's separation - AWOL. (2) The applicant contends having received multiple awards, certificates of achievement during deployment, including an AGCM, ARCOM, and AAM; being promoted to sergeant; winning the Soldier of the Quarter recognition; and was an exemplary Soldier until the AWOL incident. The Board considered this contention of service quality during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's PTSD mitigating the accepted basis for applicant's separation - AWOL. (3) The applicant contends having sought help at Fort Bliss, but to no avail, went AWOL. The Board considered this contention of service quality during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's PTSD mitigating the accepted basis for applicant's separation - AWOL. c. The Board determined that the discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD mitigating the accepted basis for applicant's separation - AWOL. Accordingly, 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 mitigated the accepted basis for applicant's separation - AWOL. 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 AR20200008165 1