1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 July 2020 b. Date Received: 5 August 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, serving with honor. The awards the applicant received during military service outweigh the few times the applicant received disciplinary action. The applicant's awards include the Purple Heart, Army Good Conduct Medal, Combat Action Badge, and numerous others. As a civilian, the applicant has not been in any trouble. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 28 July 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder outweighing the applicant's medically mitigated offenses of operating a vehicle while intoxicated and use of a controlled substance. The Board found that the applicant's medically unmitigated misconduct of a negligent discharge did not rise to a level negating meritorious service. 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 19 March 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 21 February 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant wrongfully operated a vehicle while intoxicated, used a controlled substance, and negligently discharged a firearm. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 25 February 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: Undated / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 January 2009 / 4 years, 19 weeks / The applicant extended the enlistment by a period of 12 months on 7 July 2011, giving the applicant a new ETS of: 20 May 2014. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / HS Graduate / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E -4 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 5 years, 2 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Afghanistan (13 June 2012 - 6 November 2012); Iraq (24 November 2009 - 23 November 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, PH, ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-AH, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Field Grade Article 15, dated 25 April 2012, for wrongfully using JWH-018, spice, a Schedule I controlled substance (between 27 December 2011 and 27 January 2012). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 and forfeiture of $745 pay per month for two months. Field Grade Article 15, dated 6 August 2012, for, in Afghanistan, through negligence, discharge a M249 SAW in the Transportation Motor Pool (13 June 2012). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $745 pay per month for two months (suspended); and extra duty for 45 days. Military Police Report, dated 24 April 2013, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: drunken driving (off post). Investigation revealed the German Police conducted a traffic stop on a vehicle operated by the applicant. An odor of an alcoholic beverage was detected emitting from the applicant. The applicant was administered a portable breath test which resulted in a 0.108 breath alcohol content (BAC). The applicant was apprehended and transported to the German Police Station and administered a Field Sobriety Test, which the applicant passed. The applicant was administered a blood alcohol test, which resulted in a reading of 0.110 percent BAC. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 8 August 2013, reflects the applicant was operating a vehicle on a public road while drunk. After being stopped in Ansbach, Germany, the Polizei detected an odor of alcohol emitting from the applicant. The applicant was transported to the Ansbach German Police Station and administered a blood alcohol test which resulted in a reading of 0.106 grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 August 2012, reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and understands the difference from right and wrong. The applicant had been screened for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with negative results; and mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) with positive results. The conditions were either not present or did not meet AR 40-501 criteria for a medical evaluation board. The command was advised to consider the influence of these conditions. The applicant was diagnosed with: History of substance use. AXIS III was deferred to the applicant's primary care manager, but the applicant notes vision and hearing changes and post head trauma while deployed. Report of Medical Examination, dated 20 November 2013, the examining medical physician noted in the summary of defects and diagnoses section: History of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Recommendations: follow-up with neurology if symptoms persist. Current symptoms controlled with NSAIDS. Patient refuses further follow-up with TBI clinic. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has not been in any trouble. 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 did not contend a mental health issue affected the applicant's behavior, but the contains documents which reflect the applicant had a history of TBI. The record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 13 August 2012, which reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and understands the difference from right and wrong. The applicant had been screened for mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) with positive results. The applicant was diagnosed with: History of substance use. AXIS III was deferred to the applicant's primary care manager, but the applicant notes vision and hearing changes and post head trauma while deployed. The MSE and medical examination were considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends good service, including two combat tours. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends not being in any trouble. 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. 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 diagnosis: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant is service-connected for PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that given the nexus between trauma and substance use, the applicant's DUI and spice use is mitigated. The negligent discharge was unrelated and, thus, not mitigated. (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 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder outweighed the applicant's mitigated offenses of operating a vehicle while intoxicated and use of a controlled substance. The Board found that the applicant's medically unmitigated misconduct of a negligent discharge did not rise to a level negating meritorious service. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends good service, including two combat tours. 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 mitigating a majority of the applicant's misconduct. (2) The applicant contends not being in any trouble. 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 mitigating a majority of the applicant's misconduct. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder outweighing the applicant's medically mitigated offenses of operating a vehicle while intoxicated and use of a controlled substance. The Board found that the applicant's medically unmitigated misconduct of a negligent discharge did not rise to a level negating meritorious service. 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 outweighed the applicant's mitigated offenses of operating a vehicle while intoxicated and use of a controlled substance. The Board found that the applicant's medically unmitigated misconduct of a negligent discharge did not rise to a level negating meritorious service. 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 AR20200008425 1