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, being a proud Purple Heart recipient who sustained injuries, to include PTSD and TBI, while conducting a route clearance mission outside of Kandahar, Afghanistan. After a year of treatment at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the applicant states becoming heavily addicted to painkillers and opiates. As the addiction worsened, the applicant states their behavior became more erratic and found oneself willing to do anything and everything to support the addiction. The applicant states their life was out of control because of the addiction to opiates and depression, coupled with PTSD. The applicant contends prior to the misconduct, the applicant served the country with pride and almost died. The applicant contends battling addiction, homelessness, and PTSD; however, the applicant is sober and clean. The applicant contends an upgrade will allow the help needed and access to VA benefits. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 19 October 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression mitigating the applicant's FTR offenses. The applicant's service record and the Board's compassion for the applicant's difficult post-service circumstances were found to outweigh the applicant's medically unmitigated theft offenses. 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: Court-Martial (Other) / AR 635-200, Chapter 3 / JJD / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 21 December 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Pursuant to Special Court-Martial Empowered to Adjudge a Bad-Conduct Discharge: As announced by Special Court-Martial Order Number 17, 29 June 2012, on 25 July 2011, the applicant was found guilty of the following: Charge I, in violation of Article 86. Plea Guilty. Finding Guilty: Specification 1: on or about 19 May 2011, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit: 0630 PT formation at Specker Field House. Specification 2: on or about 19 May 2011, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty, to wit: 0630 PT formation at Specker Field House. Charge II: in violation of Article 121. Plea: Guilty. Finding: Guilty: Specification 1: on or about 9 May 2011, wrongfully appropriate three bottles of 18-year-old Macallan Scotch of a value of about $450.00, the property of the Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES). Specification 2: on or about 9 May 2011, and about 15 May 2011, steal AAFES Gift Cards, of a value of about $450, the property of the Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES). (2) Adjudged Sentence: Confined for 90 days, and to be discharged from the service with a Bad Conduct discharge. (3) Date / Sentence Approved: 29 June 2012 / Confinement for 90 days, and a bad conduct discharge was approved and would be executed. The applicant was credited with 66 days of confinement towards the sentence to confinement. (4) Appellate Reviews: The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of The Army for review by the Court of Military Review. The United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence. (5) Date Sentence of BCD Ordered Executed: 29 June 2012 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 October 2008 / 3 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / High School Graduate / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 12B10, Combat Engineer / 3 years, 11 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: The DD Form 214 and the ERB does not reflect overseas service, however, the applicant was awarded a Purple Heart and an Afghanistan Campaign Medal. f. Awards and Decorations: PH, NDSM, ACM-A, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge sheet as described in previous paragraph 3c. Four Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 18 March 2011; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 12 April 2011; From "PDY" to "CMA," effective 11 May 2011; and From "CMA" to "PDY," effective 3 August 2011. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 107 days: AWOL, 18 March 2011 - 11 April 2011 / NIF CMA, 11 May 2011 - 2 August 2011 / Released from Confinement j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Kirkbride Center Discharge Summary reflects a diagnosis of Opioid Disorder and ADHD. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; VA Form 21-4138; medical documents; Certificate of Completion. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is sober and off drugs. 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 (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. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for separation specifically allows such characterization. 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 "JJD" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 3, Court-Martial (other). 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 Resource Record (AMHRR) indicates the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and the sentence was approved by the convening authority. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. The Board is empowered to change the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. The applicant contends having PTSD and TBI and after a year of treatment at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the applicant became heavily addicted to painkillers and opiates. As the addiction worsened, the applicant states the behavior became more erratic and found oneself willing to do anything and everything to support the addiction. The applicant states their life was out of control because of the addiction to opiates and depression, coupled with PTSD. The applicant provided a Kirkbride Center Discharge Summary which reflects a diagnosis of Opioid Disorder and ADHD. The AMHRR is void of a mental status report. The applicant contends current homelessness and the need for help. Eligibility for housing support program benefits for Veterans does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. Moreover, all veterans at risk for homelessness or attempting to exit homelessness can request immediate assistance by calling the National Call Center for Homeless Veterans hotline at 1-877-424-3838 for free and confidential assistance. A Homeless Veteran Outreach Coordinator, G., states in the supporting documents, having been in contact with the applicant to assist with psychological treatment and permanent housing. The correspondence indicates the applicant's conduct of discharge is not honorable currently and the applicant is not eligible for treatment at the VAMC. The applicant is a Purple Heart recipient of the Afghanistan War. The applicant has spent over a year in Walter Reed for injuries, at which time the addiction to opiates to cope with the pain increased. The young Soldier also lost their spouse and child because the applicant had no support to help the applicant cope with the injuries, pain and psychological damage suffered for our freedom; and requests the applicant's discharge be upgraded too honorable. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge would allow veterans benefits. Eligibility for veteran's benefits does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The third-party statement provided with the application speaks of the applicant's needs. It recognizes the applicant's need for help after leaving the Army. The applicant contends being sober and off drugs. 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 diagnoses/experiences: Anxiety Disorder NOS, Mood Disorder NOS (i.e., Depression), TBI, PTSD. (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 a Mood Disorder (i.e., Depression), Anxiety, and a TBI. The VA has also diagnosed and service connected the applicant for PTSD. Service connection establishes that the applicant's PTSD existed during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant's behavioral health conditions partially mitigate the discharge. Given the nexus between PTSD, Depression, and avoidance, the applicant's FTRs are mitigated by the BH conditions. Theft is not mitigated by any of the applicant's BH conditions since Anxiety, Depression, TBI, nor PTSD interfere with the ability to distinguish between right and wrong and act in accordance with the right. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant's Anxiety Disorder, Depression, Traumatic Brain Injury, or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder outweighed the applicant's medically unmitigated theft offenses. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends having PTSD and TBI and after a year of treatment at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the applicant became heavily addicted to painkillers and opiates. As the addiction worsened, the applicant states the behavior became more erratic and found oneself willing to do anything and everything to support the addiction. The applicant states the applicant's life was out of control because of the addiction to opiates and depression, coupled with PTSD. The Board liberally considered this contention but determined that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant's Anxiety Disorder, Depression, Traumatic Brain Injury, or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder outweighed the applicant's medically unmitigated theft offenses. However, the Board found that theft offenses are outweighed by the applicant's service record and the Board's compassion for the applicant's difficult post-service circumstances. Therefore, a discharge upgrade is warranted. (2) The applicant contends current homelessness and the need for help. The Board factored the applicant's homelessness into its decision to upgrade the discharge as discussed in 9b(1) above. (3) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board factored the applicant's good service into its decision to upgrade the discharge as discussed in 9b(1) above (4) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge would allow veterans benefits. The Board considered this contention and determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. (5) The applicant contends being sober and off drugs. The Board factored the applicant's sobriety into its decision to upgrade the discharge as discussed in 9b(1) above. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression mitigating the applicant's FTR offenses. The applicant's service record and the Board's compassion for the applicant's difficult post-service circumstances were found to outweigh the applicant's medically unmitigated theft offenses. 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 and Depression mitigated the applicant's FTR offenses. The applicant's service record and the Board's compassion for the applicant's difficult post-service circumstances were found to outweigh the applicant's medically unmitigated theft offenses. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, and the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (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 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 AR20210001524 1