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, prior to deploying to Iraq, the applicant's spouse left and had an abortion without the applicant's knowledge. Additionally, the applicant lost six good friends in Iraq. The applicant contends having too much to think about, so the applicant resorted to drugs to cope. The applicant only had 10 days of leave after returning from Iraq, and while on leave, the applicant was drinking heavily and taking whatever drugs were necessary to make these problems go away. The applicant states breaking down in the First Sergeant's office and confessing to doing drugs and drinking heavily. The applicant was given the opportunity to self-admit to whatever programs were available to get the help needed. The applicant admitted oneself to a psychiatric ward for detoxification and observation, which was followed by entrance into the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) and treatment with a psychiatrist. It was not until the applicant was told during a closed-door meeting with COL P., the applicant's counselor's boss, everything the applicant was experiencing was normal and the applicant should suck it up. The applicant contends going AWOL to seek help for oneself. The applicant believed if the military would not help, then who would? b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 20 July 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, Depression, PTSD outweighing the basis for separation - AWOL. 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 RE code was 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 30 April 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 March 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The Soldier absented oneself from the unit from 28 June 2006 until 4 January 2007, (190 days). (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 March 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 28 March 2007, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board as part of an Offer to Plead Guilty in a Summary Court-Martial proceedings. On 12 April 2007, the applicant's unconditional waiver was approved. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 April 2007 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 11 April 2006 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / GED / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19D10, Calvary Scout / 2 years, 11 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 5 November 2003 - 10 April 2006 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (5 January 2005 - 4 January 2006) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Three Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 27 July 2006; From "AWOL" to "DFR," effective 27 August 2006; and From "DFR" to "PDY," effective 4 January 2006. Charge Sheet, dated 27 August 2006, reflects the applicant was charged with violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, for without authority absent oneself from unit on 27 July 2006. Offer to Plead Guilty, dated 23 February 2007, reflects the applicant accepted the Article 15; plead guilty to the charge and its specification of guilty and unconditionally waived any rights to an administrative board. FG Article 15, dated 1 March 2007, for on or about 28 June 2007 absent oneself until on or about 4 January 2007. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $650 pay per month for two months and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 7 March 2007, 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 is psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the Chain of Command. Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 6 months, 6 days (AWOL, 28 June 2006 - 3 January 2007) / Return to Military Control j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Medical Examination, dated 26 March 2007, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Adjustment Disorder; depression and dependency (D&A). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; Statement in support of claim. 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 (serious offense). 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 going AWOL to seek help for oneself. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention. The AMHRR includes a Report of Mental Status Evaluation (MSE), dated 7 March 2007, which 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 was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the Chain of Command. A Report of Medical Examination, dated 26 March 2007, reflects the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Adjustment Disorder; depression and dependency (D&A). The MSE and the Report of Medical Examination were considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends family issues affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. 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: Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, Depression, 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 an Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, and Depression. The VA has also diagnosed him with combat-related PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, and Depression. The VA has also diagnosed him with combat-related PTSD. Given the nexus between PTSD, Depression, and avoidance, applicant's PTSD and Depression likely contributed to the AWOL that led to his discharge, so it is mitigated. Applicant's Adjustment Disorder and Anxiety are subsumed under the other mitigating conditions. (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 Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, Depression, PTSD outweighed the basis for separation - AWOL - for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends going AWOL to seek help for oneself. 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 Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, Depression, PTSD outweighing the basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends family issues affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. 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 Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, Depression, PTSD outweighing the basis for separation. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, Depression, PTSD outweighing the basis for separation - AWOL. Thus, warranting relief. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety, Depression, PTSD outweighing the basis for separation - AWOL. 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, paragraph 14-12a Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge BH - Behavioral Health CG - Company Grade Article 15 CID - Criminal Investigation Division ELS - Entry Level Status FG - Field Grade Article 15 GD - General Discharge HS - High School HD - Honorable Discharge IADT - Initial Active Duty Training MP - Military Police MST - Military Sexual Trauma N/A - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) - Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Re-entry SCM - Summary Court Martial SPCM - Special Court Martial SPD - Separation Program Designator TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA - Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210001760 1