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 discharged from the Army with a general (under honorable conditions) in September 2011, while in Iraq. After returning to civilian life, the applicant was treated by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center on two occasions for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and substance abuse. After completing treatment, the applicant has been working at a restaurant since 6 October 2013. The applicant was married in April 2014 and has a beautiful one-year-old child and a charming seven-year-old stepchild. The applicant is active with the stepchild’s school and football team. The applicant has been sober since the last visit at the VA Medical Center and has been an active member of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) for 63 days. The applicant has a sponsor who works closely with the applicant. The applicant has not had a criminal record since being discharged from the Army. The applicant is attending church and the applicant’s faith has become an important part of the applicant’s everyday life. The upgrade would allow for career opportunities, which would allow the applicant to pursue an education as the applicant seeks to become a physical therapist. This would help the applicant support the family and restore the applicant’s reputation. The applicant served honorably before experiencing problems, which led to the discharge. The applicant was young and acted irresponsibly but has worked to become a better person and a strong adult. The applicant has grown as a person since the discharge and requests an upgrade to honorable status. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 3 August 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 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: 9 September 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 March 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS graduate/ NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E -4 / 92G10, Food Service Operation / 3 years, 4 months, 24 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 16 April 2008 – 3 March 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Iraq (2 December 2010 – 14 July 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR, OSB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Orders 238-0002, dated 26 August 2011, reflect the applicant was to be reassigned to the U.S. Army Transition Point and discharged on 9 September 2011 from the Regular Army. The applicant’s DD Form 214, reflects the applicant had completed the first full term of service. The applicant was discharged under the authority of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, with a narrative reason of Pattern of Misconduct. The DD Form 214 was authenticated with the applicant’s electronic signature. The applicant provided Tuscaloosa VA Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Certificate, dated 29 March 2012, reflecting the applicant successfully completed the program. 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; two DD Forms 293; and Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Program (MH RRTP) Certificate. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant completed PTSD and substance abuse treatment; has maintained employment; is married, with two beautiful and charming children; is sober and an active member of AA; attends church; and does not have a criminal record. 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 non-waiverable 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) is void of the 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 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 14, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of Pattern of Misconduct, with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected her behavior at the time of the discharge. The AMHRR shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. The applicant contends being treated by the VA for PTSD and substance abuse. The applicant provided a certificate from the VA Mental Health Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Program reflecting the applicant successfully completed the program. The certificate did not disclose the conditions treated during the program. The applicant’s AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The applicant contends an upgrade will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. The applicant contends completing the PTSD and substance abuse program; maintaining employment; being married, with two beautiful and charming children; being sober and an active member of AA; attending church; and having no criminal record. 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: PTSD and Adjustment Disorder. (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 an Adjustment Disorder, and the applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for combat-related PTSD. Service connection establishes that 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 was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder. Additionally, the applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for combat-related PTSD. The medical record reveals that the basis of separation is shoplifting, drinking alcohol in a theater, and multiple FTRs. Given the nexus between PTSD, avoidance, and self-medicating with substances, the applicant’s PTSD mitigates using alcohol in a theater and the FTRs. However, there is no natural sequela between an Adjustment Disorder or PTSD and shoplifting given that neither condition interferes 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. Applying liberal consideration to the evidence, to include the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the available evidence supported a conclusion that the applicant’s PTSD and adjustment disorder outweighed a portion of the basis of separation – using alcohol in a theater and FTRS. However, available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant’s PTSD and adjustment disorder outweighed the applicant’s misconduct of shoplifting for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected the applicant’s behavior at the time of the discharge. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant’s youth and immaturity did not outweigh the seriousness of the applicant’s medically unmitigated misconduct of shoplifting. (2) The applicant contends being treated by the VA for PTSD and substance abuse. The Board liberally considered all of the applicant’s medical conditions but found the potentially mitigating behavioral health conditions of PTSD and Adjustment Disorder did not outweigh the medically unmitigated misconduct of shoplifting. (3) The applicant contends good service, to include a combat tour. The Board considered the applicant’s 3 years of service, including a combat tour in Iraq and the numerous awards received by the applicant, but determined that these factors did not outweigh the applicant’s medically unmitigated misconduct of shoplifting. (4) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board considered this contention; however, it does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. (5) The applicant contends completing the PTSD and substance abuse program; maintaining employment; being married, with two beautiful and charming children; being sober and an active member of AA; attending church; and having no criminal record. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant’s post-service accomplishments do not outweigh the seriousness of the medically unmitigated misconduct of shoplifting. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. While the applicant’s PTSD and Adjustment Disorder medically mitigated a portion of the basis of separation - drinking alcohol in a theater and multiple FTRs, the applicant’s PTSD and Adjustment Disorder did not mitigate the misconduct of multiple shoplifting incidences that were also used as part of the basis of separation. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. 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 not to change the applicant’s characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant’s PTSD and Adjustment Disorder did not excuse or mitigate the multiple offenses of shoplifting. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, as 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 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change 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 AR20210001727 1