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, the applicant believes of the 23 years in the Army Reserve, the applicant has 17 good years for credit. The applicant returned from a combat tour in Iraq in 2007. Immediately after the deployment, the applicant began experiencing PTSD related issues. The issues included agitation, irritability, hostility, hypervigilance, self-destructive behavior, and social isolation. The applicant was diagnosed with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) upon returning, which the applicant believes was a result of burn pit exposure. The applicant had never had respiratory issues before. After a year, the applicant began self- medicating with alcohol to cope with the anxiety and panic attacks. The applicant contacted Military One Source for help, but the program only authorized five counseling sessions. During a drinking blackout, the applicant consumed an illicit substance the applicant was not aware of and tested positive on a drug test that weekend. No one if the applicant needed help or had a problem. The command just started separation proceedings, which took about two years. In the meantime, the applicant continued to attend battle assemblies and received positive Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs), until separation, after a board. During this period, the applicant was administered drug tests, which were all negative. The applicant requests an upgrade or to be allowed to complete three more years in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) at any rank and retire. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 23 February 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD and depression diagnoses outweighing the applicant's drug use basis for separation. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to Honorable. 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: NIF / AR 135-175 / NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 April 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Board of Officers: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 18 August 1995 / Indefinite b. Age at Appointment / Education: 24 / Bachelor's Degree c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-4 / 31A, Military Police Officer / 23 years, 10 months, 3 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 20 January 1988 - 27 September 1993 / NIF IADT, 23 June 1988 - 1 September 1988 / NA (Concurrent Service) IADT, 22 June 1989 - 3 August 1989 / UNC (Concurrent Service) USAR, 28 September 1993 - 5 August 1994 / NIF ARNG, 6 August 1994 - 17 August 1995 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait-Iraq (12 August 2006 - 2 August 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: BSM, ARCOM-2, AAM-2, NDSM-BSS, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR, AFRM-M, MUC. g. Performance Ratings: 5 December 1996 - 4 December 1997 / Promote with Contemporaries 5 December 1997 - 4 December 1998 / Fully Qualified 5 December 1998 - 3 May 2011 / Best Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Orders D-04-204978, dated 2 April 2012, reflect the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-175, with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant provided an Electronic Mail Message from Colonel J. G., Reserve USAR Forces Command, dated 4 April 2012, reflecting the COL J. G. recommended the applicant for retention based on the applicant's character displayed since COL J. G. assumed command. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided: Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Rating Decision, dated 13 January 2009, reflecting the applicant was rated 30 percent service-connected disability for Asthma and 10 percent for Major Depressive Disorder and Insomnia claimed as anxiety, effective 2 September 2007. The VA determined Bronchitis and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder were not related to military service. Letter from E. I., Master of Social Work (MSW), Licensed Certified Social Worker (LCSW), dated 26 March 2011, reflects the applicant was referred by Military One, a division of Ceridian Corporation, as an Employment Assistance Program (EAP) client for an authorized six sessions for the period 24 October 2008 to 16 February 2009. The applicant was diagnosed with Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder. The applicant described a history of alcohol abuse and gambling. The applicant reported a psychiatrist thought the applicant might have been suffering from Bi- Polar Disorder. The VA Rating Decision, dated 25 May 2011, reflecting the applicant was rated 50 percent service-connected disability for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder with secondary Depression and Alcohol Abuse (previously diagnosed as major depressive disorder and insomnia claimed as anxiety, which was rated 10 percent disabling). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; ARNG separation orders; DD Form 214; VA letters; VA Rating Decisions; Memorandum, Appointment as a Reserve Officer; character reference; E. I., MSW/LCSW 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 because of 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 because of 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 135-175, Separation of Officers, provides policy, criteria, and procedures for the separation of officers of the Army National Guard of the United States and the U.S. Army Reserve, except for officers serving on active duty or active duty for training exceeding 90 days. (1) Paragraph 2-1, prescribes the criteria and procedures governing the involuntary separation of Reserve officers of the Army when their retention is not in the best interest of the service. Section II states the retention of officers substandard in performance of duty or conduct, deficient in character, or otherwise unsuited for military service cannot be justified in time of peace or war. The same standards of efficiency and conduct apply to all officers, regardless of component. (2) Paragraph 2-10, prescribes that unless successfully rebutted, authorizes involuntary separation of an officer because of substandard performance of duty. Officers discharged under this provision will be furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate. (3) Paragraph 2-11, prescribes that unless successfully rebutted, authorizes involuntary separation of an officer because of moral or professional dereliction. Officers discharged under this provision will be furnished an honorable or general discharge certificate, or other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the applicant's discharge from the Army Reserve. The applicant's AMHRR record does contain a properly constituted discharge order: Orders D-04-204978, dated 2 April 2012. The orders indicate the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-178, with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant contends PTSD affected behavior which led to the discharge. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The applicant provided medical documents reflecting the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD by a LCSW and the VA rated the applicant 50 percent service-connected disability for PTSD with secondary Depression and Alcohol Abuse (previously diagnosed as major depressive disorder and insomnia claimed as anxiety). The AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant contends the command did not provide any help with the applicant's issues. Army Regulation 600-85, paragraph 7-3 entitled voluntary (self) identification and referral, states voluntary (self) ID is the most desirable method of identifying substance use disorder. The individual whose performance, social conduct, interpersonal relations, or health becomes impaired because of these problems has the personal obligation to seek help. Soldiers seeking self-referral for problematic substance use may access services through BH services for a SUD evaluation. The Limited Use Policy exists to encourage Soldiers to proactively seek help. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. The applicant requests to rejoin the service to complete three years of service to retire. The applicant's requested change to the DD Form 214 does not fall within this board's purview. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. The third-party statement provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. It recognizes the applicant's good military service. 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, Depression, Generalized Anxiety Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with PTSD by a civilian provider, and the VA has service connected PTSD with secondary Depression. There is no evidence to support that applicant's post-service diagnosis of Generalized Anxiety Disorder existed during military service. (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 was diagnosed in service with PTSD by a civilian provider, and the VA has service connected PTSD with secondary Depression. While the basis of separation was not contained in applicant's file, the Board voted to accept applicant's asserted basis of separation as drug use. Given the nexus between PTSD, Depression, and self-medicating with substances, applicant's BH conditions may have contributed to the drug use that led to applicant's separation. (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 and Depression outweighed the drug use basis for separation for the aforementioned reason(s). b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends PTSD affected behavior which led to 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 drug abuse basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends the command did not provide any help with the applicant's issues. 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 drug abuse basis for separation. (3) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings along with the totality of the applicant's service record. (4) The applicant requests to rejoin the service to complete three years of service to retire. As the applicant was in the Army Reserves, there is no reentry code supplied upon discharge, honorable or otherwise. c. The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD and depression diagnoses outweighing the applicant's drug use basis for separation. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to Honorable. 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 and depression diagnoses mitigated the applicant's misconduct of drug use. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code as there were no Reasons/SPD Codes listed on the applicant's discharge paperwork, due to being in the Army Reserves, no upgrade actions are required for these items. (3) The RE code will not change, as there is no RE-code listed on the applicant's discharge paperwork, due to being in the Army Reserves, no upgrade actions are required for this item. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New Separation Order: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Authority to: AR 135-178, Paragraph 11-1a 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 AR20210002771 1