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, within the first few weeks of AIT, the applicant received the devastating news, a parent had passed away. The applicant wanted to give up but stayed strong and graduated on time. While in AIT, the applicant did not receive therapy to cope with such tragic news, the applicant was advised by Colonel S., to seek therapy once settled at the new duty station. Shortly thereafter, the applicant had constant nightmares and depression spells connected to the death of a parent. After the nightmares began the applicant could not sleep, which caused the applicant to show up to PT a few minutes late in the morning. The applicant decided to seek therapy to help oneself but was met with pushback and abuse from SGT P. The applicant contends at the age of 19, was uncertain how to cope with this situation. Upon discharge, the applicant returned home and continued therapy to work on oneself mentally. The applicant contends the current discharge has caused the applicant to miss out on several job opportunities. The applicant is currently repaying a student loan, which is causing more hardship because of not having access to the GI Bill. The applicant has contemplated the possibility of rejoining the Armed Forces, but due to the discharge, was told it would be nearly impossible to rejoin. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 30 May 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD diagnosis mitigating the applicant's multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order basis for separation. 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 voted and determined the reentry eligibility (RE) code was proper and equitable due to applicant's PTSD diagnosis warranting consideration prior to military service reentry. 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: 28 September 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 March 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between on or about 14 March 2014 and on or about 27 August 2014, on divers' occasions, the applicant failed to report to appointed place of duty. On 15 July 2014, the applicant disobeyed a lawful order from SGT P. to clean barracks room. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 May 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 February 2013 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / High School Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25U10, Signal Support System Specialist / 2 years, 7 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 5 June 2014, for failing to at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty on three occasions (between 14 March and 13 May 2014). The punishment consisted of extra duty for 7 days and written reprimand. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 7 January 2015, 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; requires further examination or testing to finalize diagnosis and recommendations. The applicant had been screened for PTSD and mTBI with negative results. Service member (SM) has been screened for substance use disorders alcohol and drugs). Findings: none indicated. Service member was seen for counseling services in 2014. SM stated would like to continue services at this time. SM was seen today for a non-confidential evaluation for AR 600-8-24, chapter 14-12b. It was explained to SM about the non-confidential nature of this evaluation and a report would be released to command. SM consented for release of report. SM has never deployed. SM is currently involved in BH services with SUSEBH and has follow up appt scheduled. Soldier meets medical retention per AR 40-504. SM was screened for PTSD and mTBI IAW OTSG/MEDCOM policy Memo 10-040. Results were negative. SM is psychiatrically cleared for Chapter 14-12b consideration per Command. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: A copy of the medical records, dated 27 July 2015, reflect the applicant was treated for an adjustment disorder. (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Medical History, dated 4 December 2014, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Anxiety attack in the field and has seen behavioral health in the past. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, self- authored letter; Memo dated 4 June 2015; Letter of support; medical records and emails from the applicant's parent to the chain of command. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant sought treatment for mental health. 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 waivable and nonwaivable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-1 Applies to: Person completing his or her term of active service who is considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army. Eligibility: Qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met. RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted RE-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaivable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. 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 the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is "JKA." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214, and dictates entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends mental health issues were the reason for the discharge. The applicant provided medical records, dated 27 July 2015, reflecting the applicant was treated for an adjustment disorder. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 7 January 2015, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and recognized right from wrong. The MSE does not indicate any diagnosis. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends being abused by SGT P. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of the discharge. The AMHRR shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. 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 applicant contends an upgrade would allow educational benefits through the GI Bill. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill 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. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. Soldiers processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 601-201, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of "3." There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or the RE code. An RE Code of "3" indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army's needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The applicant contends seeking treatment for mental health. 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. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant is service connected for 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 has compelling evidence of PTSD described on active duty (although primarily under adjustment disorder diagnosis), for which applicant is now service connected. Per DSM-5 diagnostic criteria, learning of the violent death of a close friend or family member meets guidelines for Criterion A trauma. Avoidance behaviors such as failure to report are part of the natural history and sequelae of PTSD, resulting in a nexus between the condition and the multiple FTRs noted in the basis of separation. PTSD also often results in disrespect for authority figures and failure to comply with minor directives, leading to a nexus between PTSD and noncompliance with directive to clean barracks room. (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 PTSD outweighed the multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order basis for separation for the aforementioned reason(s). b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The Board considered this contention and determined the applicant's narrative reason for discharge warrants an upgrade due to applicant's PTSD mitigating applicant's multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends mental health issues were the reason for the discharge. The Board considered this contention and determined applicant's PTSD outweighs applicant's multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order basis for separation, therefore the Board voted to upgrade the applicant's discharge to Honorable and the narrative reason for discharge to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a corresponding separation code of JKN. (3) The applicant contends was abused by SGT P. The Board considered this contention and determined there is insufficient evidence in the file to support the applicant was abused by SGT P. However, the applicant's PTSD does outweigh the applicant's multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order basis for separation. (4) The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of 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 PTSD fully outweighing the applicant's multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order basis for separation. (5) 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. (6) The applicant contends an upgrade would allow educational benefits through the GI Bill. The Board considered this contention and determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do 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. (7) The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. The Board considered this contention and voted to maintain the RE-code to a RE-3, which is a waivable code. An RE Code of "3" indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army's needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes, if appropriate. (8) The applicant contends seeking treatment for mental health. 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 PTSD fully outweighing the applicant's multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order basis for separation. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD diagnosis mitigating the applicant's multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order basis for separation. 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 voted and determined the reentry eligibility (RE) code was proper and equitable due to applicant's PTSD diagnosis warranting consideration prior to military service reentry. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address further 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 to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD mitigated the applicant's misconduct of multiple FTRs and disobeying a lawful order. 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 AR20210001911 1