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 Request 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, enlisted in the Army for an honorable reason, wanting to serve in Afghanistan to protect the country. A mental illness the applicant was not aware of until years later caused the applicant to be unable to follow directions blindly. The applicant was diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder as a juvenile. The applicant was unable to complete AIT and refused a Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) change of the applicant’s choice. The applicant’s desire to serve turned to fear and resentment toward superiors for not allowing the applicant to choose a new MOS. The applicant requests an upgraded discharge to secure a career. In a records review conducted on 7 June 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 (AWOL) / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c (1) / JKD / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 20 October 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 October 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant was AWOL from 14 August 2009 until 22 August 2009, failed to be at the appointed place of duty on numerous occasions, and violated Texas state law by consuming alcohol while under the legal drinking age on two separate occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 October 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 October 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 3 February 2009 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / None / 8 months, 7 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 21 May 2009, for disobeying a lawful order. The punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction for 7 days. Military Police Report, dated 5 July 2009, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Conduct Unbecoming - Drinking Underage; Drunk and disorderly and bring discredit (On Post). Memorandum for BAC, dated 5 July 2009, the applicant BAC was 0.185 percent. Military Police Report, dated 16 July 2009, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Fail to obey order or regulation; Consumption of Alcohol by IET student; Conduct Unbecoming Drinking Underage (On Post). Four Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant’s duty status changed as follows: From “Present for Duty (PDY)” to “Absent Without Leave (AWOL),” effective 6 July 2009; From “Absent Without Leave (AWOL)” to “Present for Duty (PDY),” effective 7 July 2009; From “Present for Duty (PDY)” to “Absent Without Leave (AWOL),” effective 14 August 2009; and, From “Absent Without Leave (AWOL)” to “Present for Duty (PDY),” effective 22 August 2009. FG Article 15, dated 14 September 2009, for without authority absent from unit on two occasions between (6 to 7 July 2009) and (14 to 22 August 2009); fail to at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty on two occasions at 2320 and midnight on 5 July 2009; As a minor consume an alcoholic beverage on or about 5 July and 16 July 2009; on or about 5 July 2009, disorderly conduct. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $699 pay per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days, and oral reprimand. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 9 days: AWOL, 6 July 2009 – 7 July 2009 / NIF AWOL, 14 August 2009 – 22 August 2009 / Returned to unit j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 9 September 2009, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Abuse and Adjustment Disorder with mixed emotional features. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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 14-12c(1) allows for an absentee returned to military control from a status of absent without leave or desertion to be separated for commission of a serious offense. 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 “JKD” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c (1), misconduct (AWOL). 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: 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. 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(1), AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is “Misconduct (AWOL),” and the separation code is “JKD.” Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly 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 not being aware of a mental illness until years later, which caused the applicant to be unable to blindly follow directions. The applicant was diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder as a juvenile. The applicant’s Chronological Record of Medical Care (CRMC), dated 9 September 2009, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Abuse and Adjustment Disorder with mixed emotions. The CRMC also states the applicant was mentally responsible, could distinguish right from wrong, possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate intelligently as a respondent in any administrative proceedings, and psychiatrically cleared the applicant for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. The CRMC was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends that the applicant mental condition impacted the applicant’s ability to complete AIT and being denied a Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) change. The AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. 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 DoD and VA medical records, applicant submissions and third party statements, and found the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder and Alcohol Abuse, which could potentially mitigate the applicant’s discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant Adjustment Disorder (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board’s Medical Advisor opined that the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder and Alcohol Abuse do not mitigate the applicant’s AWOL, FTRs and underage drinking as there is no nexus between the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder and Alcohol Abuse and the applicant’s AWOL, FTRs and Underage drinking offenses. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After applying liberal consideration of the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the available evidence does not support a conclusion that the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder and Alcohol Abuse outweighed the applicant’s medically unmitigated offenses – AWOL, FTRs and underage drinking. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should change. The Board considered this contention and determined the applicant’s narrative reason for discharge is appropriate as the applicant’s Alcohol Abuse and Adjustment Disorder did not outweigh the applicant’s offenses - AWOL, FTRs and underage drinking. (2) The applicant contends the applicant’s undiagnosed mental illness caused the applicant to be unable to blindly follow directions. The Board liberally considered this contention and determined not change is warranted as the applicant’s diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder and Alcohol Abuse do not outweigh the applicant’s AWOL, FTRs, and underage drinking. (3) The applicant contends that the applicant mental condition impacted the applicant’s ability to complete AIT and being denied a Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) change. The Board considered this contention, however, the Board determined there is no evidence in the applicant’s official records or provided by the applicant that the Command acted in an arbitrary or capricious manner. Therefore, the applicant’s discharge is appropriate. (4) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. 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 before the Board, the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder and Alcohol Abuse did not outweigh the applicant’s AWOL, FTRs, and underage drinking offenses. The Board also considered the totality of the applicant’s record, including the applicant’s behavioral health conditions and found that a discharge upgrade is not warranted. 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 applicant’s General Discharge was proper and equitable as the applicant’s misconduct fell below that level of meritorious service warranted for an upgrade to Honorable Discharge. (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 AR20210002942 1