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: The current characterization of service for the period under review is under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant failed to address alcohol problems and was self-medicating to cope with PTSD. The applicant was diagnosed by Veterans Affairs (VA) as having PTSD with alcohol abuse. The applicant states that the applicant continues to address alcohol problems through treatment and educating on further prevention. The applicant claims that this was a one-time incident with no other incidents, professionally or personally, during this military service. In a records review conducted on 2 June 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, homelessness, length of time since discharge and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD diagnosis). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. 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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 3 May 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 March 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: For wrongfully violated General Order No. 1A by possessing and consuming alcohol while deployed to Iraq; were found drunk on duty; unlawfully assaulted of PFC W. J. B., PFC J. L. J. and SGT L. W. S. while in the execution of Military Police duties; and displayed drunk and disorderly behavior. (1) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (2) Legal Consultation Date: 10 March 2011 (3) Administrative Separation Board: On 10 March 2011, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board. (4) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 7 April 2011 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 March 2005 / 7 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 92G30, Food Service Operations Specialist / 7 years, 8 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 12 August 2003 - 28 February 2005 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 March 2004 - 18 March 2005; 4 October 2006 - 29 November 2007; 11 October 2008 - 27 September 2009; 7 November 2010 - 22 April 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3, AAM, AGCM-2, NDSM, ICM-4CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-3, CAB, MUC g. Performance Ratings: 31 May 2010 - 19 April 2011 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 7 February 2011, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Simple Assault by threats (On Post). Offer to Plead Guilty at a Summary Court-Martial, dated 10 March 2011, reflects the applicant pled guilty to all charges; agreed to an administrative separation and waived the right to an administrative separation board. The offer was accepted on 15 March 2011. Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial, reflects the applicant was charged with: Charge I: Violating Article 91, UCMJ, on 7 February 2011, violate a lawful general order, by wrongfully possessing and consuming alcohol. Charge II: Violating Article 112, UCMJ, on 7 February 2011, found drunk on duty. Charge III: Violating Article 128, UCMJ, three specifications: On 7 February 2011, unlawfully strike SGT L.W.S. in the chest with foot; unlawfully grab and twist PFC W.J.B. by the thumb with hand; unlawfully strike PFC W.J.B. on the face with hand; assault PFC J.L.J. by grabbing and pulling. Charge IV: Violating Article 134, UCMJ, on 7 February 2011, for drunk and disorderly. The sentenced adjudged: Reduction to E-5; restriction for 60 days. 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 19 September 2013, reflecting the applicant was rated 70 percent disability for PTSD with alcohol abuse. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; VA Rating Decision 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) Paragraph 3-7c states Under other-than-honorable-conditions discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable and it may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial based on certain circumstances or patterns of behavior or acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. (5) 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. (6) 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. (7) 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. (8) 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 memorandum. 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 an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. 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 being diagnosed with PTSD with alcohol abuse by the VA. 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's PTSD could mitigate the bases for separation. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for combat-related PTSD. Service connection establishes that applicant's PTSD existed during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor, after applying liberal consideration, opined that the applicant's PTSD partially mitigates the basis of separation (violating a general order by possessing and consuming alcohol while deployed to Iraq, as well as being drunk on duty) as there is a nexus between PTSD and self-medicating with substances. However, the Medical Advisor concluded that there are no natural sequela between the applicant's PTSD and the applicant's other basis for separation - the offense of assault. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the ADRB's application of liberal consideration, the Board concurred with the Board Medical Advisor and determined that the applicant's PTSD does not outweigh the unmitigated basis of separation - the offense of assault.. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. The Board considered this contention and the determined that there is insufficient evidence to warrant a change based on the severity of the assault offense. Therefore, a discharge upgrade is not warranted based on this contention. (2) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered this contention and 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 assault to a victim, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting an discharge upgrade. (3) The applicant contends being diagnosed with PTSD with alcohol abuse by the VA. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant was diagnosed and service connected by the VA for combat-related PTSD. However, the applicant's PTSD diagnosis does not outweigh the unmitigated offense of assault. Therefore, a discharge upgrade is not warranted based on this contention. c. The Board determined the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, homelessness and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD diagnosis). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions because the applicant had a BH condition which partially mitigated the applicant's misconduct of possessing and consuming alcohol while deployed, drunk on duty, violating General Order number 1. In addition to a partially mitigating condition, the applicant was homeless, had 24 months of decorated combat service during the current enlistment, and it has been over 10 years since the discharge. 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 and 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: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20210002848 1