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, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Muskogee Regional Office determined the applicant had severe post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), major depression disorder (MDD), anxiety disorder (AD), and impulse control disorder (ICD) during the applicant's military service. Based on a series of assessments and examinations, a diagnosis of severe PTSD, MDD, and AD was assigned along with other psychological disorders. The Army only prescribed medication for anxiety but later refused to refill the prescription, which is documented in the applicant's military service records and explains the applicant's unusual impulsive behavior. The applicant believes PTSD affected the applicant's duty performance after the first deployment to Iraq. The VA found an injury to the anterior neck and the cervical spine, which caused severe pain and constant and continuous migraine headaches, affected the applicant's cognitive skills when making decisions while performing military duties. The VA granted the applicant a combined rating of 100 percent disability, which was granted because the applicant was unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation because of the service-connected disabilities. The applicant's three combat tours were between 15 March 2004 and 14 March 2005; 7 November 2006 and 12 December 2007; and 15 July 2009 and 25 April 2010. The mental issues because of the combat tours inhibited the applicant's thoughts, interfered with daily living activities, and hindered the applicant's abilities to communicate effectively with military units. The applicant's psychological disorders of PTSD, MDD, and ICD affected the applicant's ability to manage the thoughts, behaviors, and duty performance to the best of the applicant's abilities in the latter part of the military career and during the deployments to Iraq. If the applicant had received adequate treatment while in the military, no misconduct would have occurred. The lack of treatment affected the applicant's ability to control the behavior; therefore, the general (under honorable conditions) discharge should be upgraded to honorable. Verification of the entitlements may be obtained from the Muskogee VA Regional Office. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 3 October 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder mitigating the applicant's FTR and disobeying a lawful order offenses, and the applicant's service record and the length of time outweighing the medically unmitigated misconduct of bigamy and making a false official statement. 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 22 December 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 December 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant failed to report on numerous occasions between 21 March and 17 October 2011; The applicant made false official statements on 6 May and 17 October 2011; The applicant disobeyed a senior noncommissioned officer (NCO) on 14 October 2011; and The applicant committed bigamy on 20 March 2009. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 5 December 2011, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 5 December 2011, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 13 December 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 November 2007 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / HS Graduate / 85 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 13D20, 2S Field Artillery Automation / 11 years, 1 month, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 15 November 2000 - 20 June 2005 / HD RA, 21 June 2005 - 8 November 2007 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 March 2004 - 14 March 2005, 17 November 2006 - 12 December 2007, 7 May 2009 - 27 April 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-4, AAM-4, MUC, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR-3 g. Performance Ratings: 1 April 2009 - 31 March 2010 / Marginal 1 April 2010 - 31 March 2011 / Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Register of Actions, 1 February 2007, reflects in the divorce court case between the applicant, the plaintiff; A. E. W., the plaintiff; and L. N. W., the defendant, a petition for divorce was filed on 1 February 2007 and amended on 29 March 2007. The petition was served on 31 July 2007. The Dismissal Order of Divorce was signed on 8 September 2008. Marriage License, 20 March 2009, reflecting the applicant married A. A. A. Company Grade Article 15, 16 August 2011, for on six occasions failing to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty (30 August 2010, 28 September 2010, 12 October 2010, 20 December 2010, 24 March 2010, and 8 July 2011). The DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ, is void of the punishment imposed. Application for Uniformed Services Identification Card DEERS Enrollment, 16 November 2011, reflects the applicant's dependents as L. N. W., the spouse, with a marriage date of 19 February 2002, and A. E. A., the child, with a birth year of 2003. Memorandum (Commander's Report), 5 December 2011, reflects the applicant received an Article 15, imposed on 6 September 2011, and the punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $300. Display Patient Appointments, undated, reflect the applicant was receiving medical treatment between 23 February and 28 July 2011, and the applicant cancelled 4 of the 19 scheduled appointments and was a "no show," on one occasion. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for but not limited to: Failure to maintain Class A and Army Service Uniform; Violation of Article 92, failure to obey order or regulation; Missing scheduled appointments; Being absent without leave; Failure to report; Responsibilities while attached to the Central Issue Facility; Making a false statement; and Review of Bar to Reenlistment and initiation of separation. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Chronological Record of Medical Care, 4 May 2010, reflecting the applicant reported symptoms of anxiety and PTSD, and being prescribed medication since 2007, which helped the symptoms, and particularly the symptoms of depression. The applicant was just back from the third deployment to Iraq and wanted to continue treatment. Report of Medical History, 28 July 2011, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Anxiety disorder, depression, and PTSD. The applicant was seen by Community Mental Health Services and prescribed medication. (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Medical History as described in previous paragraph 4j(1). Report of Mental Status Evaluation, 7 November 2011, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings; could appreciate the difference between right and wrong; and met medical retention requirements. The applicant had been screened for PTSD and mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) with negative 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 diagnoses for AXIS I and AXIS II were deferred. When the applicant was assigned to Fort Bliss, the applicant's antidepressant medication was not renewed for four or five months, which the applicant states hurt the applicant's working ability and made concentration difficult. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; Chronological Record of Medical Care; Report of Medical History; Report of Medical Examination; Hearing Conservation Data; and Report of Medical Assessment. 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 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 14-12b, addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, pattern of misconduct. 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 contends being diagnosed with PTSD, MDD, AD, ICD, and a neck and cervical spine injury by the VA, and the conditions affected behavior, which ultimate led to the discharge. The applicant provided military service medical records reflecting the applicant reported symptoms of anxiety and PTSD and was prescribed medication, and a Report of Medical History, 28 July 2011, reflecting the examining medical physician noted anxiety disorder, depression, and PTSD. The applicant did not provide any documents from the VA to support the contention. The AMHRR contains a copy of the Report of Medical History submitted by the applicant. The applicant's AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 7 November 2011, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and recognized right from wrong. The applicant had been screened for PTSD and mTBI with negative results. The applicant was on antidepressants, which were not renewed for four or five months. The MSE does not indicate any diagnosis, but the diagnoses for AXIS I and AXIS II were deferred. The MSE and Report of Medical History were considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends the VA rated the applicant 100 percent service-connected disabled. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention. The applicant contends the lack of medical treatment affected the applicant's ability to control the behavior. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends good service, including three 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 documents to verify the applicant's entitlements may be obtained from the VA. In accordance with AR 15-180, the applicant is required to submit DD Form 293, along with any supporting evidence or materials. To gain information on how to request copies of VA medical records, the applicant may visit the https://www.va.gov or seek assistance through a Veterans' Service Organization. 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: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder. The applicant also asserts Impulse Control Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that potentially mitigating diagnoses were rendered post-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 PTSD, Anxiety Disorder, and MDD partially mitigate the applicant's offenses. As there is a relationship between PTSD and avoidance there is a nexus between the misconduct characterized by FTR such that the misconduct is mitigated. Likewise, as there is a relationship between PTSD and problems with authority figures, there is a nexus between the applicant's minor misconduct of not reporting to the gym, as instructed by an NCO, which constituted the disrespect of an NCO. However, the applicant's misconduct characterized by making a false official statement and misconduct characterized by committing bigamy are not mitigated as they are not natural sequela of PTSD nor are they natural sequala of the potentially mitigating diagnoses of Anxiety Disorder or MDD, as neither diagnoses rendered the applicant unable to differentiate between right and wrong and adhere to 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 Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder outweighed the applicant's medically unmitigated offenses of bigamy and making a false official statement. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends being diagnosed with PTSD, MDD, AD, ICD, and a neck and cervical spine injury by the VA, and the conditions affected behavior which ultimate led to the discharge. The Board liberally considered this contention but determined that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder outweighed the applicant's medically unmitigated offenses of bigamy and making a false official statement. However, the Board found that the applicant's medically unmitigated conduct was outweighed by the totality of the applicant's service record and the discharge having served its purpose in the years since separation. Therefore, a discharge upgrade is warranted. (2) The applicant contends the VA rated the applicant 100 percent service-connected disabled. The Board liberally considered all of the applicant's medical conditions but found those potentially mitigating behavioral health conditions did not outweigh the applicant's medically unmitigated false official statement and bigamy offenses. However, the Board did determine to upgrade the discharge as discussed above in 9b(1). (3) The applicant contends the lack of medical treatment affected the applicant's ability to control the behavior. The Board considered this contention during proceedings but ultimately did not address it for the reasons discussed in 9b(1) above. (4) The applicant contends good service, including three combat tours. The Board factored the applicant's good service in its decision to upgrade the discharge. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder mitigating the applicant's FTR and disobeying a lawful order offenses, and the applicant's service record and the length of time outweighing the medically unmitigated misconduct of bigamy and making a false official statement. 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 Traumatic Stress Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder mitigated the applicant's FTR and disobeying a lawful order offenses, and the applicant's service record and the length of time outweighed the medically unmitigated misconduct of bigamy and making a false official statement. 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 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 AR20210001564 1