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, serving honorably and fighting well. The applicant showed textbook symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but it was unknown to the new chain of command because they had not been through combat. The applicant's infractions were minor, mostly drinking-related, but were made to sound worse than they were. The applicant was having several problems and did not know what was happening. The applicant was later diagnosed with PTSD and a mild traumatic brain injury (TBI). The applicant is totally and permanently disabled. The applicant was not offered any treatment and was just pushed out the door a few months before the applicant's enlistment was scheduled to end, after years of serving honorably without any problems and fighting a war. The applicant participated in the Airborne invasion in northern Iraq and stayed in the country the whole time during deployment. The applicant would have made a career out of the Army. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 20 September 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's behavioral health diagnoses (PTSD/TBI) and length/quality of service (to include combat service). 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 Board changed the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) with a corresponding separation code of JKN. The behavioral health conditions are service limiting and thus, the reentry eligibility (RE) code will remain 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: Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 September 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 14 September 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 10 July 2004, the applicant assaulted Private (PVT) A. on two occasions; The applicant treated Sergeant (SGT) C. with contempt; On 2 April 2004, the applicant displayed drunk and disorderly conduct; and On 2 April 2004, the applicant willfully damaged government property. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 14 September 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 September 2004 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 January 2002 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / GED / 111 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 2 years, 8 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Italy, Macedonia, SWA / Iraq (25 March 2003 - 26 February 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR, OSR, GWOTSM, CIB, ICM-BSS-BAH, VUA g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summarized Article 15, 29 April 2004, for being drunk and disorderly (2 April 2004); and willfully damaging a wooden chair and a wall locker, military property (2 April 2004). The punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Company Grade Article 15, 23 July 2004, for pouring beer on PVT A. (10 July 2004); shoving PVT A. back into a chair (10 July 2004); and treating SGT C., a noncommissioned officer (NCO), with contempt by threatening SGT C. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $364 pay; and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Questura Di Padova (Italian) Police Report, 28 August 2004, reflects the Padova Police Officers received an emergency call on three young individuals fighting in downtown. The applicant was identified as one of the individuals. The two Soldiers were intoxicated and belligerent towards the patrol officers. Both the applicant and the other Soldier had blood on the body and clothes. The applicant had lacerations and bruises but refused medical treatment. The applicant and the other Soldier were charged with being drunken and disorderly. The Soldiers were detained and further released to their units' representatives. Military Police Desk Blotter, 31 August 2004, reflects after the applicant was detained by the Padova Police for drunk and disorder conduct. The applicant was released to the unit representative and escorted to the Military Police Station and administered a breathalyzer test, which resulted in .203 percent and .193 percent BAC. Two Developmental Counseling Forms (1) for being drunk and disorderly and (2) for disobeying a direct order from the platoon sergeant and commander not to consume alcohol because of Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) enrollment. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, 7 September 2004, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings; was mentally responsible; and met medical retention requirements. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 215; DD Form 293; and Army Review Board Case Management Division letter. 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 14-12c prescribes a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, 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 applicant's request, supporting documents, evidentiary record, medical review, and published Department of Defense guidance for liberal consideration of discharge upgrade requests were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends being diagnosed with PTSD/TBI and being permanently disabled, both being conditions that affected the behavior which ultimately led to the discharge. The applicant did not submit any evidence other than the applicant's statement to support the contention the discharge resulted from a medical condition. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of a PTSD or mTBI diagnosis. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on7 September 2004, which indicates the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and was mentally responsible. The MSE does not indicate any diagnosis. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. On 22 October 2015 the ARBA sent a letter to the applicant at the address in the application, requesting documentation to support a PTSD/TBI diagnosis but received no response. The applicant claims the offenses leading to the discharge were minor. The AMHRR indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends being discharged by the command without receiving any treatment for the mental health conditions. 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 a combat tour. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. 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, the applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has the following potentially mitigating diagnoses/experiences: Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury. (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 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury. Service connection establishes that the applicant's Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury existed during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partial. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury, which are behavioral health conditions that provide partial mitigation. Given the nexus between Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Traumatic Brain Injury, and self-medicating with substances, the applicant's drunk and disorderly conduct and acts of contempt are mitigated. Damaging government property misconduct (also part of the basis of separation) is not. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the applicant's Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury outweighed self- medicating with substances, drunk and disorderly conduct, and acts of contempt. Damaging government property was not mitigated, but the Board considered the severity of this misconduct against the behavioral health diagnoses and voted in favor of an upgrade. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends being diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain and being permanently disabled, both being conditions that affected the behavior which ultimately led to the discharge. applicant contends being diagnosed Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury mitigating the applicant's self-medicating with substances, drunk and disorderly conduct, act of contempt. The Board determined that the outstanding misconduct (damaging government property) did not outweigh the determination to upgrade. (2) The applicant claims the offenses leading to the discharge were minor. 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 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury fully outweighing the applicant's basis for separation. (3) The applicant contends being discharged by the command without receiving any treatment for the mental health conditions. The Board considered this contention and determined that there is insufficient evidence in the evidentiary record that the applicant was not provided sufficient access to Behavioral Health resources. (4) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings, along with the totality of the service record. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's behavioral health diagnoses (PTSD/TBI) and length/quality of service (to include combat service). 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 Board changed the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) with a corresponding separation code of JKN. The behavioral health conditions are service limiting and thus, the reentry eligibility (RE) code will remain RE-3. 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 Traumatic Brain Injury mitigated the applicant's 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) because the applicant's Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury mitigated most of the applicant's misconduct. The remaining/unmitigated misconduct (damaging government property) was noted but considered minor. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JKN. (3) The behavioral health conditions are service limiting, so the reentry eligibility (RE) code will remain 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: 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 AR20210001664 1