1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 c. Counsel: Yes 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, the discharge was inequitable because it was based on a single incident in 11 years of service. The applicant served in the military occupational specialties Power Generation Equipment Repairer and Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) Specialist. The applicant held the EOD military occupational specialty for most of the time in the service, over a ten year period. The applicant served honorably and placed oneself in life-threatening danger, defusing improvised munitions. The applicant received various awards and decorations, attended multiple training courses intended to advance the applicant’s career, and twice served in a designated imminent danger zone while deployed. The applicant was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), slipped L-5-6 vertebrae, a knee injury, and arthritic conditions related to time in service and injuries sustained while deployed. The PTSD diagnosis was the major contributing factor leading to the applicant's discharge, as the diagnosis indicated the applicant was suicidal, depressed, had recurring memories of life-threatening situations, nightmares, and had difficulty maintaining relationships. The applicant was prescribed Zoloft, Buspar, and Tramadol. The applicant was the victim of undiagnosed alcoholism following the first deployment, wherein the applicant would regularly consume more than 12 alcoholic beverages per day to cope with mental stress and wildly out of control emotions brought on by the things the applicant witnessed while deployed. The combination of prescription medication, undiagnosed alcoholism, PTSD, depression, and physical pain resulting from multiple deployments led to a momentary lapse in judgment. The applicant’s discharge fails to reflect the many good deeds, meritorious actions, and lives saved during the applicant’s Army career. Since the discharge, the applicant has sought treatment, improved the applicant’s personal relationships with the spouse, become a responsible father, stopped drinking, found gainful employment, attended regular religious services, and is a contributing member of society. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable to reflect the contributions to the Army for over 11 years. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 14 December 2022, 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 16 August 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: The applicant provided an Acknowledgment of Receipt of Separation Notice, under the provisions of chapter 14-12c, commissions of a serious offense, dated 19 February 2013. (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant provided: A copy of a Request for Conditional Waiver, which contains the option to conditionally waive consideration of the case before an administrative separation board, contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The document was not signed, and the applicant did not elect any of the available options. Memorandum, dated 12 March 2013, reflecting the separation authority denied the request for conditional waiver. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 December 2009 / 4 years / The applicant extended the most recent enlistment by a period of 3 months on 7 November 2011, giving the applicant a new ETS of: 6 March 2014. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / HS Graduate / 124 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 89D30, EOD Specialist / 13 years, 1 month, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 21June 2000 – 2 September 2002 / HD IADT, 31 May 2001 – 8 March 2002 / HD (Concurrent Service) RA, 3 September 2002 – 13 February 2006 / HD RA, 14 February 2006 – 6 December 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (9 February 2004 – 9 February 2005; 23 January 2008 – 22 April 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: MUC-2, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM-4CS, NCOPDR-3, ASR g. Performance Ratings: 1 September 2009 – 29 September 2011 / Fully Capable 30 September 2011 – 29 September 2012 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant provided a Developmental Counseling Form, dated 2 August 2012, for being considered for separation under AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, commission of a serious offense, for receiving a Field Grade Article 15 for violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in December 2011 and losing MOS qualification because of personal misconduct in an AR 15-6 Investigation. The applicant’s DD Form 214, reflects the applicant had completed the first full term of service. The applicant was discharged under the authority of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, with a narrative reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense). The DD Form 214 was authenticated with the applicant’s electronic signature. The applicant’s Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), dated 6 June 2013, reflects the applicant was flagged for Adverse Action (AA), effective 12 January 2012; and Involuntary Separation or Discharge (Field Initiated) (BA), effective 23 July 2012; and was ineligible for reenlistment because of Pending Separation (9V). The applicant was reduced from E-6 to E-5, effective 16 August 2012. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of the Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 11 March 2013, reflecting the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, chronic; meniscus tear, HLP; financial stressors, legal stressors, new child; likely separation from the Army; and global assessment of functioning (GAF) score of 65. The applicant was prescribed Zoloft and Buspar. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; DD form 214; DD Form 293; Letter from the attorney; Chronological Record of Medical Care; and separation documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends seeking treatment, improving the personal relationship with the spouse, becoming a responsible parent, refraining from drinking, finding gainful employment, attending regular religious services, and contributing to society. 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 waivable and nonwaivable 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 waivable. 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. T The applicant’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) is void of the complete 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 with 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 14-12c, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant contends a combination of prescription medication, undiagnosed alcoholism, PTSD, depression, and physical pain affected behavior and led to the discharge. The applicant provided medical documents indicating diagnoses of in-service: PTSD, chronic; financial stressors, legal stressors, new child; likely separation from the Army; and global assessment of functioning (GAF) score of 65. The applicant was prescribed medication. The AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-5, in pertinent part, stipulates circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends good service, including two combat tours. The applicant contends seeking treatment, improving the personal relationship with the spouse, becoming a responsible parent, refraining from drinking, finding gainful employment, attending regular religious services, and contributing to society. 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. The third-party statement provided with the application speaks highly of the applicant and recognize the applicant’s good military service and good conduct after leaving the Army. 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: The applicant held in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Depression, Episodic Mood Disorder, and PTSD. The applicant is 70% service connected for PTSD with additional diagnoses of Mood Disorder NOS and Major Depressive Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board Medical Advisor found that the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder, Depression, Episodic Mood Disorder, PTSD, Mood Disorder NOS and Major Depressive Disorder existed during the applicant’s military 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 the applicant’s PTSD mitigates the applicant’s Board accepted basis of separation of drinking on duty as there is a nexus between PTSD and self-medication. However, the Board Medical Advisor found that the applicant’s PTSD and other behavior health conditions do not mitigate the applicant’s Board accepted basis of separation – improperly disposing of AT-4 ammunition and bringing unauthorized civilians on the range as these offenses required conscious step-by- step decisions over time to violate an order, find a location to fire the ammunition, proceed to do so, and then attempt to evade detection. The applicant’s actions regarding these offenses do not align with trauma behavior. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After liberally considering the evidence, while PTSD mitigates the alcohol related offense of Consumption of Alcohol while on Duty, the unmitigated misconduct of Improperly disposing of AT-4 ammo and bringing unauthorized civilians to the range and lying to the commander are not mitigated. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends a combination of prescription medication, undiagnosed alcoholism, PTSD, depression, and physical pain affected behavior and led to the discharge. The board considered this contention and provided partial mitigation for the alcohol-related misconduct based on a PTSD diagnosis. The remaining unmitigated misconduct, however, meant that the applicant’s overall service did not rise to a level of meritorious service required for an Honorable Discharge. (2) The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. The Board considered this contention and determined that there is insufficient evidence in the applicant’s official records or provided by the applicant other than the applicant’s statement to support this contention. Ultimately, the Board determined that the assertion alone did not warrant an upgrade. The applicant was properly and equitably discharged. (3) The applicant contends good service, including two combat tours. The Board considered the totality of the applicant’s service record, but determined the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of the applicant’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By improperly disposing of AT-4 ammo and bringing unauthorized civilians to the range, and lying to the commander, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. (4) The applicant contends seeking treatment, improving the personal relationship with the spouse, becoming a responsible parent, refraining from drinking, finding gainful employment, attending regular religious services, and contributing to society. The Board considered this contention regarding post-service accomplishments, and ultimately determined that the seriousness of the offenses outweighed the listed post-service accomplishments. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the 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 not to change the applicant’s characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence, the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder, Depression, Episodic Mood Disorder, PTSD, Mood Disorder NOS and Major Depressive Disorder do not outweigh the applicant’s medically unmitigated Board accepted basis of separation – Improperly disposing of AT-4 ammo and bringing unauthorized civilians to the range, and lying to the commander. 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. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, 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 AR20210002305 1