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 under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, as a more dedicated and hardworking Soldier, the applicant would put everything on hold at the drop of a hat to serve the Soldiers on the left and right. The applicant served with honor and integrity. However, the applicant was under significant duress for the last two months while stationed in Hawaii and felt there was no one to speak to without fear of retribution from the direct chain of command. The constant harassment from a direct supervisor, a newly assigned squad leader, caused the applicant to become depressed, and reaching out to the base mental health clinic brought no concrete solution. The applicant committed a massive mistake and has been suffering the consequences for almost a decade, which should never have happened in the first place. The applicant was battling with thoughts of suicide, and in a state of confusion and panic, left the base. The applicant's attempt to obtain mental health records from Schofield Barracks, which documented the applicant's numerous trips for depression and anxiety, was futile. The applicant spoke with the location, the VA, and the National Archives office in Missouri. Character reference statements from Soldiers with whom the applicant served, acquaintances, and past employers are provided to demonstrate the military character. If the applicant could relive the events of 2007, the applicant would do so in a heartbeat and would go to any length to make things right. The applicant is eager to proudly complete the contract and serve the country. The outstanding military service prior to the AWOL period should be considered. The applicant further details the contentions in an allied self- authored statement provided with the application. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 09 November 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was improper based on the applicant's Major Depression mitigating the applicant's misconduct. 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, and the reentry code to 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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 14 May 2007 c. Separation Facts: The applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) is void of the case separation file. (1) Date and Charges Preferred (DD Form 458, Charge Sheet): NIF (2) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (3) Basis for Separation: NIF (4) Recommended Characterization: NIF (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 June 2004 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / High School Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 8 months, 6 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 3 July 2003 - 14 June 2004 / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii / NIF / The applicant's self-authored statement and a third-party statement reflect having served in Iraq, arriving in Iraq in October 2004; however, the combat service is not reflected on the DD Form 214. f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR / The applicant's online application reflects award of the GWOTEM, CIB, AAM, AFEM, ASUA, and ARCOM; however, the awards are not reflected on the DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant's DD Form 214, reflects the applicant had not completed the first full term of service. The applicant was discharged under the authority of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, with a narrative reason of In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. The DD Form 214 was not authenticated with the applicant's electronic signature. The applicant had lost time for the period, 3 November 2006 to 8 January 2007. Orders 130-0686, 10 May 2007, reflect the applicant was to be reassigned to the U.S. Army Transition Point and discharged on 14 May 2007 from the Regular Army. Service School Academic Evaluation Report, 20 September 2006, reflects the applicant achieved the course standards for the Warrior Leader Course, Class 507. The Report reflects the applicant's superior demonstrated abilities with oral communication, leadership skills, and contribution to group work, and the applicant earned a certificate of academic excellence from the Academy's Commandant. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 67 days (AWOL, 3 November 2006 - 8 January 2007) / NIF j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; self-authored statement; four third-party statements; Criminal History/Arrest Record Request Consent Form; DA Form 1059; and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has held positions of leadership in management and has never been arrested or otherwise, 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 (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) Paragraph 3-7c states Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable and it may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial based on certain circumstances or patterns of behavior or acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. (5) 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. (6) 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.) (7) Paragraph 10b stipulates Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper. 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 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 not authenticated by the applicant's electronic signature. The applicant's DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, by reason of In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial," and the separation code is "KFS." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and 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 being a dedicated and hardworking Soldier, who served with honor and integrity, and had an outstanding military service prior to going AWOL. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends being harassed by a direct member of the chain of command. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention, and there is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant sought assistance or reported the harassment. The applicant contends being under significant duress and felt there was no one to speak to without fear of retribution from the direct chain of command, which caused the applicant to become depressed, and the base mental health clinic offering no concrete solution, the applicant went AWOL. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention the discharge resulted from any medical condition. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of any behavioral health diagnosis. The applicant contends serving in positions of leadership in management and has never been arrested or otherwise, been 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. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service, and proudly complete the contract and serve. Soldiers processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 601-210, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of "4." An RE code of "4" cannot be waived, and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. The third-party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's character and performance and recognize the applicant's good conduct after leaving the Army. 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: Major Depression. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with Major Depression. (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 was diagnosed in service with Major Depression. While the full facts and circumstances of the applicant's discharge are not contained in the file, the service record supports the applicant's contention that AWOL was the basis of separation. Given the nexus between Major Depression, avoidance, loss of interest, and low motivation, the applicant's Major Depression likely contributed to the AWOL and therefore, mitigates the AWOL. Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the applicant's Major Depression outweighed the applicant going AWOL - basis of separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable and narrative reason changed. The Board considered this contention during proceedings and voted to grant an upgrade based on the applicant's Major Depression and applicant's length, quality and combat service outweighing the applicant's - AWOL basis for separation. Thus, an upgrade of the characterization of service and narrative reason for separation code is warranted. (2) The applicant contends being a dedicated and hardworking Soldier, who served with honor and integrity, and had an outstanding military service prior to going AWOL. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the information outlined above in paragraph 9b (1). (3) The applicant contends being harassed by a direct member of the chain of command. The Board liberally considered this contention, however the Board determined that there is no evidence of said conduct by command in official records, and the applicant did not provide any supporting documentation that the applicant sought assistance or reported the harassment to provide merit to the claim. Nevertheless, the Board voted that relief was warranted based on other circumstances as outlined above in paragraph 9b (1). (4) The applicant contends being under significant duress and felt there was no one to speak to without fear of retribution from the direct chain of command, which caused the applicant to become depressed, and the base mental health clinic offering no concrete solution, the applicant went AWOL. The Board considered this contention and the applicant's assertion of inequity however, the Board determined that there is no evidence of said inequity in the available AMHRR or evidence of arbitrary or capricious by the command. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention the discharge resulted from any medical condition. Nevertheless, the Board voted that relief was warranted based on other circumstances as outlined above in paragraph 9b (1). (5) The applicant contends serving in positions of leadership in management and has never been arrested or otherwise, been 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 information outlined above in paragraph 9b (1). (6) The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service, and proudly complete the contract and serve. The Board considered this contention during proceedings and concluded that before being allowed to reenlist an Army Recruiter can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army (pending the waiver process). c. The Board determined that the characterization of service is improper based on the applicant's Major Depression mitigated the misconduct - AWOL. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to 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 applicant has exhausted their appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant's contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's Major Depression mitigated the applicant's misconduct - AWOL the listed basis of separation. 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 voted to change the reentry code to RE-3. 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: RE-3 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 AR20210001500 1