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, after returning from a deployment, the applicant started to realize something was not right but could not put their finger on it. The ex-spouse complained about the applicant being violent in their sleep and there were times the applicant had cold sweats during the night or first thing in the morning. After the applicant PCS'd to Fort Wainwright, the mental health symptoms started. The applicant started to feel isolated and began to have suicidal thoughts and ideations. Coping with the feelings of being isolated and having sleeping issues, the applicant started to get depressed and having anxiety. One day while in the motor pool, the applicant lost their cool, punched a wall locker, and broke their hand. This started the separation from the Army. The applicant's transition back to civilian life has been very rocky at times and somewhat rewarding. The applicant has battled homelessness on multiple occasions and been able to graduate with a bachelor's degree. The applicant is unemployed and recently divorced with two kids. The applicant volunteers at Florida Agriculture and Mechanical University in the Sports Medicine and Strength and Conditioning Department. The applicant has kept a clean criminal record and will be starting school to obtain a master's degree. The applicant is seeking an upgrade to better future career opportunities. An upgrade would help teach the kids and other veterans presidency [sic] pays off and more importantly a lesson in resiliency. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 20 June 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's MDD outweighing the accepted basis for separation - multiple FTRs, disrespect to an NCO, and disorderly conduct. 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 eligibility (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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 March 2014 c. Separation Facts: The applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) is void of the case separation file. (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: 31 December 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / High School Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 15Q10, Air Traffic Control Operator / 5 years, 2 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska, SWA / Afghanistan (1 November 2009 - 4 November 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, AAM, NDSM, ASR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 20 May 2013, for being disrespectful in deportment towards Sergeant P. by striking a wall locker with the fist on or about 5 April 2013; and being disorderly, which conduct was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces on or about 5 April 2013. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3; forfeiture of $1,007 pay, suspended; extra duty for 30 days; and written reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings, dated 27 November 2013, reflect the following diagnosis: Major Depressive Disorder, recurrent, mild diagnosed by QTC/VA as Major Depressive Disorder, recurrent, moderate fails AR 40-501 Ch 3-32 band c. VA Rating Decision Letter, dated 21 June 2014, reflects the applicant was granted 70 percent service-connected disability for major depressive disorder, recurrent (also claimed as adjustment disorder and PTSD). (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Two DD Forms 293; VA Rating Decision; DD Form 214; self-authored statement; six third-party letters; ADRB Case; DA Form 3947; Medical Evaluation Board Narrative Summary. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has been able to graduate with a bachelor's degree and volunteers at Florida Agriculture and Mechanical University in the Sports Medicine and Strength and Conditioning Department and will be starting school to start a master's degree in athletic training. 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's Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR) is void of the specific 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 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 after returning from deployment, realized something was not right but could not put their finger on it. The Army failed to seek treatment for the applicant instead they discharged the applicant. The applicant's conduct was caused by their mental health illness which the applicant is now being treated. The applicant provided documentation which supports a diagnosis of in-service depression. The applicant provided a copy of Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings, dated 27 November 2013, which reflects the following diagnosis: Major Depressive Disorder, recurrent, mild diagnosed by QTC/VA as Major Depressive Disorder, recurrent, moderate fails AR 40-501 Ch 3-32 b and c. The applicant also provided a copy of VA Rating Decision Letter, dated 21 June 2014, which reflects the applicant was granted 70 percent service-connected disability for Major Depressive Disorder, recurrent (also claimed as Adjustment Disorder and PTSD). The AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant contends battling homelessness on multiple occasions. 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. The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. The third-party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. They all recognize the applicant's good conduct while serving in the Army and academic performance while in college. The applicant has been able to graduate with a bachelor's degree and volunteers at Florida Agriculture and Mechanical University in the Sports Medicine and Strength and Conditioning Department and will be starting school to start a master's degree in athletic training. 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: Major Depressive Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found evidence of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) while on Active Duty, for which he is now service connected by the VA. (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 has clear evidence of noteworthy Major Depressive Disorder diagnosed/treated on active duty for which he is now service connected. Unfortunately, the basis of separation is not located in the official records and a review of applicant's extensive medical records does not appear to provide full and clear data associated with such circumstances. However, there are references to disciplinary offenses to include frequent tardiness/FTR noted in medical records and incident in which applicant demonstrated disrespect to an NCO and acted in a disorderly manner by punching a wall-locker noted in applicant's military records. The medical advisor opines applicant's major depressive disorder mitigates such offenses. Specifically, major depression is often associated with lack of energy/motivation, sleep impairment, and disengagement from responsibilities, creating a nexus between depression and tardiness/FTR. Depression is also characterized by irritability and possible agitation, leading to a nexus between the incident with punching a wall locker, to include the associated disrespect and disorderly behavior noted in the record. (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 MDD outweighed the accepted basis for separation - multiple FTRs, disrespect to an NCO, and disorderly conduct - for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. 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 MDD outweighing the applicant's basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends after returning from deployment, realized something was not right but could not put their finger on it. The Army failed to seek treatment for the applicant instead they discharged the applicant. The applicant's conduct was caused by their mental health illness which the applicant is now being treated. 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 MDD outweighing the applicant's basis for separation. (3) The applicant contends battling homelessness on multiple occasions. 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 MDD outweighing the applicant's basis for separation. (4) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board considered this contention but does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. (5) The applicant has been able to graduate with a bachelor's degree and volunteers at Florida Agriculture and Mechanical University in the Sports Medicine and Strength and Conditioning Department and will be starting school to start a master's degree in athletic training. 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 MDD outweighing the applicant's basis for separation. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's MDD outweighing the accepted basis for separation - multiple FTRs, disrespect to an NCO, and disorderly conduct. Thus, relief is warranted. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's MDD outweighed the accepted basis for separation - multiple FTRs, disrespect to an NCO, and disorderly conduct. 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 AR20210001840 1