1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 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, while in combat for 13 months without a day off, the applicant was served with divorce and child custody papers upon returning to Hawaii. The applicant was not allowed to leave Hawaii and was forced to go AWOL to care for the broken- down family. With so many things going wrong and coping with the combat stress, the applicant returned home for approximately 190 days. The applicant returned to military control once everything was in order. The applicant was deemed unfit for combat because Hawaii did not have any childcare or family care programs. The applicant and the family experienced hardship because of the discharge, and the applicant made significant physical and mental sacrifices while struggling with PTSD. Years of honorable service without any Article 15 or punishment, as well as combat service should be honored. The applicant further details the contentions in a self-authored statement provided with the application. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 16 November 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) outweighing the applicant's AWOL offense. 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. Accordingly, the narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) with a corresponding separation code of JKN and reentry code of RE-3. 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 16 December 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date and Charges Preferred (DD Form 458, Charge Sheet): On 5 October 2009, the applicant was charged with: The Charge: Violation of Article 86, UCMJ, for being AWOL from 10 June to 26 September 2009. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 5 October 2009 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 November 2009 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 April 2007 / 6 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / High School Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 4 months, 7 days / The applicant's DD Form 214, block 11, erroneously reflects "None" as the applicant's Primary Specialty. d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Iraq (7 December 2007 - 19 February 2009) / The applicant's AMHRR reflects a combat deployment; however, the tour is not reflected on the DD Form 214. f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, CIB / The applicant's AMHRR reflects overseas service; however, it is not reflected on the DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: NA Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Three Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)," to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 10 June 2009; From "AWOL" to "Dropped From Rolls (DFR)," effective 11 July 2009; and From "DFR" to "PDY," effective 26 September 2009. Report of Return of Absentee, 26 September 2009, reflects the applicant surrendered to military authorities. Charge sheet as described in previous paragraph 3c. h. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 108 days (AWOL, 10 June 2009 - 25 September 2009) / Surrendered to Military Authorities j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Psychosocial Assessment, 27 August 2012, reflects an "Axis I" diagnosis of "309.81 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, chronic, delayed, severe," and the applicant, as an Iraq veteran, presented "classic symptomatology related to service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder," and there were "nexus between [the applicant's] current symptoms and [the] military experience." (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; DD Form 214; VFW news article; Licensed Psychologist letter; Psychosocial Assessment; Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) Scale; VA Form 21 (Review Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Disability Benefits Questionnaire; self-authored statement; and two third-party statements. 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 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) 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 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. (5) Paragraph 10-8a stipulates a discharge under other than honorable conditions normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record during the current enlistment. (See chap 3, sec II.) 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 "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. 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-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. 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 evidence in the applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel, voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court- martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and indicated an understanding an under other than honorable conditions discharge could be received, and the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. The general (under honorable conditions) discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. The applicant contends family issues, being handed divorce papers with child custody issues, affected the behavior, and ultimately caused the discharge. There is no evidence in the AMHRR indicating the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends the discharge caused the applicant to make significant physical and mental sacrifices while struggling with PTSD. The applicant provided medical documents which indicated an "Axis I" diagnosis of "309.81 PTSD, chronic, delayed, severe." The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of a PTSD diagnosis. The applicant contends that years of honorable service without any Article 15 or punishment, including a combat tour, should be honored. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The third-party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's character and performance and confirm the applicant's struggles with the 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: PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for PTSD. Service connection establishes that the applicant's PTSD existed during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for PTSD. Given the nexus between PTSD and avoidance, the AWOL that led to the applicant's separation is mitigated. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor's opine, the Board determined that the applicant's PTSD outweighed the applicant's AWOL offense. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the discharge caused the applicant to make significant physical and mental sacrifices while struggling with PTSD. The Board liberally considered this contention and determined that the applicant's PTSD outweighed the applicant's AWOL offense. (2) The applicant contends family issues, being handed divorce paper with child custody issues, affected the behavior, and ultimately caused the discharge. 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 fully outweighing the applicant's AWOL offense. (3) The applicant contends years of honorable service without any Article 15s or punishment, including a combat tour, should be honored. 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 fully outweighing the applicant's AWOL offense. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD outweighing the applicant's AWOL offense 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. Accordingly, the narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) with a corresponding separation code of JKN and the reentry code of RE-3. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD outweighed the applicant's misconduct of 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 change to RE-3. 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: RE-3 e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200 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 AR20210001422 1