1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 c. Counsel: S 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is honorable. The applicant, through counsel, requests a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, has a single negative mark on otherwise impressive service record, which restricts the applicant's potential for future success. The applicant contends underlying condition of Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (depression / anxiety) the single act of misconduct would not have occurred. The applicant's positive post service behavior, and the diagnosis of PTSD should be considered as a mitigating factor. In a records review conducted on 2 June 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is inequitable. Therefore, the Board directed the issue of a new DD Form 214 changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14- 12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 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, Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 24 March 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 20 October 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 26 July 2014, the applicant did physically control a vehicle, a passenger car, while drunk; and, physically control a vehicle, a passenger car, in a reckless manner by nearly striking PV2 B.J.V. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 14 November 2014, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 1 December 2014, the applicant appeared with counsel before an administrative separation board. The board determined the applicant committed a serious offense as contemplated by AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c. The board recommended separation with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. On 24 February 2015, the findings were and approved and the separation authority directed the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 February 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 October 2012 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 years / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 25U2P, Signal Support Systems Specialist / 7 years, 2 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 15 January 2008 - 8 October 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Afghanistan (5 November 2011 - 5 November 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM-2, AAM-4, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2, MOVSM, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 3 June 2014 - 25 November 2014 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 23 October 2014, reflects the applicant was driving while impaired. On 26 July 2014, after being stopped for attempting to enter an access control point, the applicant refused to take a lawfully requested breathalyzer test. Developmental Counseling Forms, for DUI. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of a VA disability rating decision, dated 28 March 2018, reflecting the applicant was rated 30 percent disability for PTSD (also claimed as depression and anxiety disorder). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Legal Brief with all listed enclosures (military records, Kurta Guidance, College Transcripts, VA Award Letter, self-authored statement, case separation packet). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states completing an IT Bachelor's Degree; and, has obtained employment. The applicant assisted over a dozen professionals from the USA to the Philippines with online presence, sharing experiences with alcoholism, adversity, and personal development through applicant's Blog and Podcast. 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. (7) Chapter 15 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army's best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary's approved designee as announced in updated memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. 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 a narrative reason change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with an honorable discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs the preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be 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 a best friend's suicide affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. 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 the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Army Regulation 635-200, 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 a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. The applicant contends the VA has granted a service-connected disability for PTSD. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention the discharge resulted from any medical condition. The applicant's AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation (MSE). The applicant contends obtaining employment and volunteering in the community. 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. Applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for Other Specified Trauma Related Disorder, which is noted to be combat-related; however, applicant has already been upgraded to an HD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for Other Specified Trauma Related Disorder, which is noted to be combat-related. Service connection establishes that the condition existed during military service. However, applicant has already been upgraded to an HD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor determined that the medical condition partially mitigates the basis of separation. The Board's Medical Advisor opined that the applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for Other Specified Trauma Related Disorder, which is noted to be combat-related. Given the nexus between trauma and self-medicating with substances, there was likely some association between applicant's service connected BH condition and the alcohol use that led to the DUI that was the basis for his separation. Applicant's discharge has already been upgraded to HD, but he is requesting a narrative reason change. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB concurred with the medical opine Given the nexus between trauma and self-medicating with substances, there was likely some association between applicant's service connected BH condition and the alcohol use that led to the DUI that was the basis for his separation, Therefore, the Board concluded the applicant's BH condition did outweigh the misconduct. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, and ultimately determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is inequitable. 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 applicant was involuntarily separated for misconduct, and the applicant's combat related Other Specified Trauma Related Disorder does not fully excuse the entirety of the applicant's responsibility for the misconduct. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JKN. (2) 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. (3) The applicant contends the VA has granted a service-connected disability for PTSD. 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 that the applicant was diagnosed and service connected for Other Specified Trauma Related Disorder, which is noted to be combat-related; however, the applicant has already been upgraded to an HD. c. The Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is improper. Therefore, the Board directed the issue of a new DD Form 214 changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the characterization of service due to it already being Honorable. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), 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: No Change 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 AR20210002847 1