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, suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after serving a tour in Iraq. The applicant was recently diagnosed with PTSD and received a disability entitlement letter. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 15 February 2023, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board’s decision. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 19 September 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 August 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: -The Soldier misused a Government Travel Card -The Solider was derelict of duties as a Special Agent -The Soldier was absent without leave (AWOL) from 5 to 27 February 2007 and -The Soldier was AWOL from 13 to 19 April 2007. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions / The intermediate commanders recommended general (under honorable conditions). (4) Legal Consultation Date: 14 August 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 14 August 2007, the applicant conditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board, contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) discharge. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 30 August 2007 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 April 2003 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 21W20, Carpentry / Masonry Specialist / 9 years, 1 month, 27 days / The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects the applicant held the MOS 21W10 for 7 months and the MOS 31D, CID Special Agent for 8 years, 10 months. d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 22 June 1998 – 1 April 2003 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, Saudi Arabia, SWA / Iraq (14 March 2004 – 13 January 2005) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, AGCM-2, NDSM, AFEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR / The applicant’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) reflects award of the JSAM and ARCOM; however, the awards are not reflected on the applicant’s DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: March 2003 – January 2005 / Fully Capable February 2005 – January 2006 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Four Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant’s duty status changed as follows: From “Present for Duty (PDY),” to “Absent Without Leave (AWOL),” effective date 5 February 2007; From “AWOL” to “PDY,” effective date 28 February 2007; From “PDY” to “AWOL,” effective date 13 April 2007; and From “AWOL,” to “PDY,” effective date 19 April 2007. Field Grade Article 15, dated 10 April 2006, for: The applicant on divers occasions fail to obey a lawful general regulation, to wit: DoD Financial Management Regulation, by wrongfully misusing the Government Travel Card for cash advances and purchases (between 24 April and 10 May 2005 and 26 November 2005 and 4 January 2006). The applicant was derelict in the performance of duties, on two occasions, by willfully failing to interview Specialist (SPC) E. D. (9 August 2005) and to initiate a Criminal Investigation Command Report of Inquiry case file when notified and responded to a housebreaking and larceny offense (12 December 2005). The applicant with intent to deceive make to Investigator T. S., an official statement in an email statement, “Your [person] denied any involvement. I will turn the case in for closure and it will be mail (sic) out to you by the end of the week,” which statement was false in that the applicant did not interview SPC E. D. (1 November 2005). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4 and forfeiture of $1,009 pay per month for two months (suspended). Record Of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 5 October 2006, reflects the suspended portion of the punishment imposed on 10 April 2006, was vacated for: Article 92, on divers occasions failing to obey a lawful general regulation, to wit: DoD Financial Management Regulation, by wrongfully misusing the Government Travel Card for cash advances and purchases (1 to 30 September 2006). Field Grade Article 15, dated 8 March 2007, for, without authority, being absent from the unit (from 5 to 27 February 2007). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2. Company Grade Article 15, dated 18 May 2007, for without authority, being absent from the unit (from 13 to 19 April 2007). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 June 2007, reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings; was mentally responsible; and met medical retention requirements. Commander’s Report, undated, reflects in an attempt to rehabilitate the Soldier, the Soldier was reclassified to Carpentry and Masonry Specialist and placed on reassignment orders to Fort Rucker. After completing the service school, the Soldier failed to report back to parent unit on 5 February to clear the installation and remained absent until 27 February 2007. Two Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 29 days: AWOL, 5 February 2007 – 27 February 2007 / NIF AWOL, 13 April 2007 – 18 April 2007 / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: (1) Applicant Provided: Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) letter, dated 29 September 2016, reflecting the applicant was rated 30 percent service-connected disability for PTSD with pathological gambling in remission, with an overall combined rating of 40 percent among other medical conditions. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; VA letter. 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 14-12b, 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 a 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 suffering from PTSD after serving in Iraq and being recently diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. The applicant provided a VA letter reflecting the applicant was rated 30 percent service-connected for PTSD. The Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 27 June 2007, which indicates the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings; was mentally responsible; and met medical retention requirements. The MSE does not indicate any diagnosis. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. 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: the applicant is service connected for PTSD with additional diagnoses of Unspecified Anxiety Disorder and Gambling Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant asserts PTSD in-service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that AWOLs are mitigated due to the nexus between trauma and avoidance. However, trauma is unrelated to misuse of a GTC and the dereliction of duties. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the condition or experience did not outweigh the basis of separation. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant contends suffering from PTSD after serving in Iraq and being recently diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. The ADRB is not bound by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decisions. There is no law or regulation which requires that an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the Board determination that there was a condition or experience that existed during the applicant’s time in service. The Board must also articulate the nexus between that condition or experience and the basis for separation. Then, the Board must determine that the condition or experience outweighed the basis for separation. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former service member is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the ARBA when determining a member’s discharge characterization. In this case, the Board determined the discharge was proper and equitable. c. The Board determined the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, considering the current evidence of record. The applicant has exhausted their appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant’s contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant’s BH diagnoses of asserted PTSD, Unspecified Anxiety Disorder and Gambling Disorder did not excuse or mitigate the offenses of misuse of the Government Travel Card or dereliction of duties as a Special Agent. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. Therefore, the Board determined that the discharge is proper and equitable and no discharge upgrade is warranted as the applicant’s DUI fell below that level of satisfactory service warranting a General Discharge or meritorious service warranting an Honorable Discharge. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL – Absent Without Leave AMHRR – Army Military Human Resource Record BCD – Bad Conduct Discharge BH – Behavioral Health CG – Company Grade Article 15 CID – Criminal Investigation Division ELS – Entry Level Status FG – Field Grade Article 15 GD – General Discharge HS – High School HD – Honorable Discharge IADT – Initial Active Duty Training MP – Military Police MST – Military Sexual Trauma N/A – Not applicable NCO – Noncommissioned Officer NIF – Not in File NOS – Not Otherwise Specified OAD – Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) – Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF – Official Military Personnel File PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE – Re-entry SCM – Summary Court Martial SPCM – Special Court Martial SPD – Separation Program Designator TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury UNC – Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC – Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA – Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210002242 1