1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 c. Counsel: 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 treated unfairly and was given the wrong type of discharge, coincidentally three days before the applicant's expiration term of service (ETS). The applicant was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) while in service and was treated for the condition. The applicant believes all of this led to the applicant's behavior issues and subsequent discipline by the applicant's chain of command. The applicant was forced out of the Army. The Secretary of Defense at the time, Chuck Hagel issued Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military Records, dated 3 September 2014. The applicant's case meets the criteria and is justification for an upgrade of the discharge to honorable. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 11 April 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD outweighed the basis for separation - disobedience, false official statement, drunk and disorderly, dereliction, and FTRs. 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 21 December 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 6 December 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 10 October and 2 November 2013, the applicant disobeyed a lawful order from the superior commissioned officer by consuming alcohol; On 9 December 2012 and 11 October 2013, the applicant violated the curfew policy; On 12 October 2013, the applicant gave a false official statement; On 11 October 2013, the applicant was drunk and disorderly; On 22 June 2013, the applicant was found to be derelict by failing to abstain from drinking alcohol; On 3 June 2013, the applicant was unable to perform the duties because of prior overindulgence; On 13 May 2013, the applicant failed to report for a mission and the 0630 and 0900 formations; and The applicant exceeded the monthly liquor rations during the month of April 2013. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 6 December 2013, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 6 December 2013, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board as part of an Offer to Plead Guilty in Summary Court-Martial proceedings. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 December 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 July 2007 / 6 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 111 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 6 years, 4 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Iraq (12 December 2008 - 10 December 2009; 2 February 2011 - 1 November 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ICM-3CS, ARCOM-2, AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-2, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 9 December 2012, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: failure to obey general order - other (curfew violation), Article 92, UCMJ (on post). Company Grade Article 15, dated 11 January 2013, for fail to obey a lawful general order by wrongfully being off the installation during curfew hours without a proper pass (9 December 2012). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Electronic Mail Message, dated 25 June 2013, reflects the automatic USFK Ration Control Monitory Notification reflects the applicant violated the alcohol ration control limit. Offer to Plead Guilty, dated 27 November 2013, reflects charges were preferred against the applicant and the applicant agreed to pled guilty to five specifications and in exchange the convening authority would refer to case to a summary court-martial and approve no punishments greater than authorized. The applicant would unconditionally waive any right to an administrative separation board provided the applicant was separated with a characterization of service no worse than a general (under honorable conditions). Report of Result of Trial reflects the applicant was tried in a Summary Court-Martial on 3 December 2013. The applicant was charged with five specifications. The summary of offenses, pleas, and findings: Violation of Article 90, UCMJ, Willfully Disobey a Commissioned Officer: On 10 and 11 October 2013; guilty consistent with the plea; and On 2 November 2013; guilty, consistent with the plea. Violation of Article 92, UCMJ, Fail to Obey Lawful General Order on 11 October 2013; guilty, consistent with the plea. Violation of Article 107, UCMJ, Making a False Official Statement on 12 October 2013; guilty, consistent with the plea. Violation of Article 134, UCMJ, Drunk and Disorderly on 11 October 2013; guilty, consistent with the plea. Sentence: Reduction to E-1; forfeiture $1,010 pay; and confinement for 20 days. The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), dated 23 December 2013, reflects the applicant's ETS date as 26 December 2013. The applicant was reduced from E-3 to E-1 effective 3 December 2013. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 16 days (CMA, 3 December 2013 - 18 December 2013) / Released from Confinement j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Department of Veterans Affairs Rating Decision, dated 10 September 2014, reflecting the applicant was rated 30 percent service-connected disabled for PTSD with alcohol abuse disorder (also claimed as depression). (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 August 2013, reflects 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 diagnosed with: PTSD and alcohol dependence. It is unclear at this point if Servicemember anxiety symptoms contributed to the offenses. Servicemember struggle with sobriety may be because of the lack of consistent treatment to address the PTSD symptoms. The provider recommended the applicant be given 90 days to participate in a trial of evidence based treatment. If the Servicemember is unable to utilize more appropriate coping strategies at the end of treatment, an administrative action would be appropriate. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; VA Rating Decision; Initial Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Disability Benefits Questionnaire. 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 PTSD affected behavior which ultimately led to the discharge. The applicant provided VA rating decision, reflecting the applicant was rated 30 percent service- connected disabled for PTSD, with alcohol abuse disorder (also claimed as depression). The applicant's AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 13 August 2013, which indicates 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 diagnosed with: PTSD and alcohol dependence. The provider stated it was unclear if Servicemember's anxiety symptoms contributed to the offenses. Servicemember's struggle with sobriety may be because of the lack of consistent treatment to address the PTSD symptoms. The provider recommended the applicant be given 90 days to participate in a trial of evidence based treatment. If the Servicemember is unable to utilize more appropriate coping strategies at the end of treatment, an administrative action would be appropriate. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends being treated unfairly and was discharged coincidently three days prior to ETS. The applicant was discharged on 21 December 2013. The applicant's ERB reflects the applicant's ETS was on 26 December 2013. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. 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 applicant was diagnosed with PTSD during active service and is now service connected for this condition. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partial. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant has clear evidence of PTSD while on Active Duty and is service connected for the condition; substance abuse is part of the natural course and sequelae of PTSD. The applicant has a clear pattern of alcohol dependence, and the evidence suggests that the disciplinary history leading to discharge, while noteworthy and significant, is almost if not entirely related to alcohol abuse/dependence even if some offenses are indirectly related to use (eg, failure to obey order, violating curfew). There is a nexus between PTSD and these offenses. PTSD would not mitigate the charge of making a false official statement, but the circumstances and severity of this offense are unclear. In summary, PTSD partially mitigates the offenses leading to discharge, but the advisor finds that the evidence for mitigation is compelling and worthy of consideration by the Board. (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 basis for separation - disobedience, false official statement, drunk and disorderly, dereliction, and FTRs. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends PTSD affected behavior which ultimately led to the discharge. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to PTSD mitigating the applicant's misconduct. (2) The applicant contends being treated unfairly and was discharged coincidently three days prior to ETS. 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 outweighing the applicant's basis for separation. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD outweighing the basis for separation - disobedience, false official statement, drunk and disorderly, dereliction, and FTRs - 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 PTSD outweighed the basis for separation - disobedience, false official statement, drunk and disorderly, dereliction, and FTRs. 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 and the applicant's PTSD though mitigating, is service limiting. 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 AR20210002059 1