1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 16 March 2020 b. Date Received: 10 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant suffers from permanent and total in nature post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) directly connected to military service. After returning a deployment to Iraq the applicant felt unable to return due to undiagnosed PTSD symptoms. The applicant expressed this to the commander the unwillingness to return to Iraq. The applicant was sent to a psychiatric ward due to a suicide attempt. Following the release from the psychiatric ward, the applicant chose jail over returning to Iraq. The applicant had honorable service. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 31 March 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD mitigated the applicant's AWOL, disrespect, and disobedience 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. 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 (AWOL) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c (1) / JKD / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 16 November 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 September 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant was found guilty by Special Court-Martial of violation of the UCMJ, Article 87, Miss movement through design, Article 89, Disrespect to superior officer, Article 90, 1 Specification, Disobey superior officer, 1 specification, Offer violence against superior commissioned officer, Article 91,1 Specification, Disobey noncommissioned officer, 1 Specification, Disrespect to noncommissioned officer, Article 134, 2 Specification, Drunk and Disorderly. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 September 2005 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 August 2001 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 3 years, 9 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Italy / NIF f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR Driver and Mechanic Badge- Driver-W g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: SCMO Number 19, dated 19 October 2005, reflects the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty of missing movement by design on or about 7 March 2005; on or about 7 March 2005, the applicant behaved with disrespect towards a superior commissioned officer; on or about 7 March 2005, willfully disobeyed a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer; on or about; and on or about 2 April 2006, was disrespectful in language towards a noncommissioned officer. The punishment consisted of reduction private/E-1; forfeiture of $500 pay per month for 6 months; and confinement for 6 months. The sentence was adjudged on 22 July 2005. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL X 7 days (2 July 2004 - 8 July 2004) / Return Pretrial Confinement X 94 days (18 April 2005 - 21 July 2005) Confinement X 56 days (22 July 2005 - 16 September 2005) / Released j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: The applicant provides a VA Rating Decision, dated 18 June 2019, which reflects the applicant has an evaluation of PTSD with alcohol use disorder and polysubstance abuse disorder, which was rated 70 percent and increased to 100 percent effective 28 March 2019. The applicant provides a Discharge Summary from Lighthouse Behavioral Health Hospital, which indicate the applicant was admitted on 24 April 2017 and discharged on 15 May 2017. The applicant was diagnosed with major depressive disorder, PTSD, and cocaine, alcohol, and cannabis dependency. The applicant provides a Discharge Summary from Lighthouse Behavioral Health Hospital, which indicate the applicant was admitted on 24 May 2017 and discharged on 31 May 2017. The applicant was diagnosed with polysubstance dependence, major depressive disorder (recurrent), and PTSD. (2) AMHRR Listed: A Mental Status Evaluation (MSE), dated 22 September 2005, reflects the applicant had no evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through medical channels. The applicant was mentally responsible and could distinguish right from wrong. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command. The applicant was diagnosed with Antisocial Personality Disorder (Provisional). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, VA Rating Decision, dated 18 June 2019, Medical documents. 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), 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 14-12c (1) allows for an absentee returned to military control from a status of absent without leave or desertion to be separated for commission of a serious offense. 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 contends, in effect, an undiagnosed mental health diagnosis of PTSD was a mitigating factor leading the discharge. The applicant's AMHRR contains documentation which supports a diagnosis of in-service antisocial personality disorder (Provisional). The record shows the applicant underwent a MSE on 22 September 2005, which indicates the applicant had no evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through medical channels. The applicant was mentally responsible and could distinguish right from wrong. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant provides a VA Rating Decision, dated 18 June 2019, which reflects the applicant has an evaluation of PTSD with alcohol use disorder and polysubstance abuse disorder, which was rated 70 percent and increased to 100 percent effective 28 March 2019. The applicant also provides a Discharge Summary from Lighthouse Behavioral Health Hospital, which indicate the applicant was admitted on 24 April 2017 and discharged on 15 May 2017. The applicant was diagnosed with major depressive disorder, PTSD, and cocaine, alcohol, and cannabis dependency. 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. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that VA establishment of 100% service connection for PTSD links it to military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partial. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined and determined that the applicant has a BH condition, PTSD, which mitigates most of applicant's misconduct. As there is an association between PTS and avoidant behavior, difficulty with authority figures and self- medication with alcohol, there is a nexus between applicant's PTSD and the offenses of missing movement, being disrespectful towards a superior officer and an NCO, disobeying a superior officer and an NCO and being drunk and disorderly. However, PTSD does not mitigate the offense of violence towards a superior officer given that PTSD does not affect one's ability to distinguish right from wrong and act in accordance with the right. (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 outweighed AWOL, disrespect, and disobedience misconduct for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant contends, in effect, an undiagnosed mental health diagnosis of PTSD was a mitigating factor leading the discharge. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the discharge due to the applicant's PTSD mitigating the applicant's AWOL, disrespect, and disobedience misconduct; thus, relief was warranted. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD mitigated the applicant's AWOL, disrespect, and disobedience 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. 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 applicant's AWOL, disrespect, and disobedience. 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 / Separation Order: 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 AR20200010144 1