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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the presumption of regularity which may normally permit the Board to assume the service acted correctly in characterizing service as less than honorable does not apply to the case because of the evidence the applicant submitted. The applicant's conduct and efficiency ratings/behavior and proficiency marks were good. The applicant received letters of recommendation. The record of promotions shows the applicant was generally a good service member. The record of NJP's/Article 15's, indicate only isolated or minor offenses. The applicant served exactly 1,184 days on Active Duty and was three months and twenty-nine days from ETS date but was given a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant was a well-rounded Soldier with a work ethic no one could deny and received every rank with a promotion waiver, because the applicant was diligent, and a proud Soldier. The applicant deserves this discharge upgrade because despite the discharge the applicant remains resilient. The applicant continues to strive to get education and prove to the current employers the applicant is honorable. The applicant works full time and attends Community College as a full-time student. The applicant has attached letters of recommendation from a former commander and squad leader, current employer and written statements from peers at the time of discharge and proof of outstanding academic achievements. Although the applicant is willing to accept a role in the discharge, the applicant thinks attached statements will speak bounds to who the applicant was as a Soldier. The applicant hopes the Board will see from their kind words and the applicant's persistence to acquire an education and be the best the applicant can be. The applicant is deserving of a discharge upgrade. In a records review conducted on 11 February 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on quality of service, and post service accomplishments as compared to the PTSD partially mitigated basis for separation. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to Honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a corresponding separation code of 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 20 April 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 April 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant failed to obey a lawful order issued by SSG J. V., to pay the spouse an amount of $684.90 per month on or about 1 March 2016; was disrespectful in language towards SSG J. V. on or about 26 June 2015; and failed to be at the appointed place of duty on or about 8 September 2015 and on or about 14 September 2015. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 April 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 6 April 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 January 2013 / 3 years, 30 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / 87 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91S10, Stryker Systems Maintainer / 3 years, 2 months, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 October 2015, reflects from a behavioral health perspective, the service member meets the medical fitness standards for retention per AR 40-501 3-31 to 3-37 as there was no indication of a boardable behavioral health disorder at the time. The service member was cleared from a behavior health perspective for administrative separation IAW 635-200. The applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 7 January 2016, reflects at the time of discharge from a hospital, from a behavioral health perspective, could understand and participate in administrative proceedings, could appreciate the difference between right and wrong and met medical retention requirements. The applicant required temporary duty limitation and would likely require behavioral health treatment to be restored to full duty. The applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD form 293; DD Form 214; self-authored statement; 13 third-party letters; two DD Forms 4187; college transcripts. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant works full time and attends Community College as a full time student and is due to graduate in 2019. The applicant has been a good citizen since being discharged. 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 14-12a addresses minor disciplinary infractions, defined as a pattern of misconduct, consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. (7) Paragraph 14-12b, addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, pattern of misconduct. 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 and a narrative reason code 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 to be changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is "JKA." 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 good service. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. The applicant contends they have obtained full time employment and attends college full time. 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 statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. They all recognize the applicant as a good Soldier while serving in the Army. The current employer has also provided a statement and states the applicant is a valuable asset to the company. 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 was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder and is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for PTSD that could mitigate applicant's basis of separation. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, found applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder and is diagnosed and service connected by the VA for PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, opined based upon the nexus between PTSD, difficulty with authority, and avoidance, applicant's PTSD mitigates disrespectful language and FTRs. However, there is no association between applicant's PTSD or Adjustment Disorder and failing to obey an order to pay his spouse since this was a conscious, deliberate act not related to his trauma or Adjustment Disorder. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that applicant's PTSD and Adjustment Disorder do not outweigh failing to obey an order to pay his spouse since this was a conscious, deliberate act for the reasons listed in (3) above. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to change the narrative reason because applicant's unmitigated failing to obey an order to pay his spouse was only minor misconduct. (2) The applicant contends good service. The Board considered applicant's quality of service during its deliberation, and the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on quality of service, and post service accomplishments as compared to the PTSD partially mitigated basis for separation. (3) The applicant contends they have obtained full time employment and attends college full time. The Board considered the applicant's post-service accomplishments during deliberation. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the Board determination that the discharge is inequitable based on quality of service, and post service accomplishments as compared to the PTSD partially mitigated basis for separation. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on quality of service, and post service accomplishments as compared to the PTSD partially mitigated basis for separation. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) under the same pretexts. 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: Honorable 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 FTR - Failure to Report 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 AR20210003196 1