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 mental health issues caused instability and poor judgment. The applicant claims applicant's mental health was poorly disintegrated along with all the symptoms of PTSD and a few other medical conditions. On 12 January 2006, the applicant claims applicant deployed to Mosul Iraq and posted on guard duty at the main gate. The Soldiers at the gate were to inspect civilians' vehicles to maintain a high level of security. The applicant claims applicant witnessed horrific car bombs and other things, which caused nightmares and made it impossible to sleep, but carried on with the mission. The applicant claims applicant informed supervisors and medical professionals of having trouble sleeping, nightmares, and flashbacks. The applicant claims applicant asked for help, but very little help was provided. The applicant claims applicant was enrolled in a mental health treatment facility after returning from Iraq by the chain of command, but with little support. In 2006, the applicant returned from Iraq and was preparing to complete the post-deployment form. The applicant claims applicant's section sergeant told the applicant answering yes to most of the questions would end the career and the applicant was going through jitters and it would go away in a few days. The applicant claims applicant "sucked it up" to not let the team down and appear to be the weakest link. The applicant claims applicant's mental health became worse and resulted in admission into the psychiatric ward at Fort Lewis, WA, on 23 August 2007. The treatment did not improve the applicant's situation and several loved ones died while the applicant was dealing with mental issues: the applicant's son in February 2008; father on 1 March 2008; and, mother on 15 March 2008. The applicant claims applicant believed there was very little support from the chain of command and the applicant was facing the burdens and pains alone. The applicant's statement appears to be incomplete from applicant's application for this Boards review. In a records review conducted on 12 April 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, when considering the applicant's 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 change 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. The Board determined the RE code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 July 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: The Notification is dated 8 February 2008 (dated prior to the legal consultation date), but the Soldier's Acknowledgment is not in the file. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 29 August 2007, the applicant tested positive for wrongful use of cocaine, was counseled on numerous times for failure to pay debts, lying to a noncommissioned officer, and failure to report. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 February 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 4 February 2008, the applicant conditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board, contingent upon receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 18 March 2008, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of the rights. On 22 May 2008, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant's discharge with characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. On 26 June 2008, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 June 2008 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 May 2005 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 92 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25L10, Cable Systems Installer/Maintainer / 3 years, 23 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (12 January 2006 - 16 October 2006) f. Awards and Decorations: MUC, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, ICM-BSS g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 12 April 2007, for on five occasions, without authority, failing to go at the time to the appointed place of duty (28 February, 15, 20 and 26 March 2007). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $340 pay; and, extra duty for 14 days. Memorandum, subject: Requirement RE Testing Result Involving (Drug(s) Other than Marijuana, dated 11 September 2007, reflect the applicant submitted a urine sample on 29 August 2007, during an Inspection Unit (IU) and the sample tested positive for cocaine. DD Form 2624, undated, reflects the applicant submitted a urine sample, during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing, conducted on 29 August 2007. Bar to Reenlistment Certificate, dated 27 September 2007, the applicant's immediate commander initiated a bar to reenlistment against the applicant for various indicators of untrainability or unsuitability, including drugs. The applicant elected not to submit a statement and the bar was approved on 15 October 2007. FG Article 15, dated 3 October 2007, for wrongfully using cocaine (between 29 July and 29 August 2007). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $650 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 4 October 2007, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant was mentally responsible, could distinguish right from wrong, and could participate in any administrative proceedings. Report of Proceedings by Investigating Officer/Board of Officers, dated 22 May 2008, reflects the investigating officer found: The applicant committed a serious offense within the meaning of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Section II, paragraph 14-12c and should not be retained in the military. The Summary of Board Proceedings reflect as the applicant's commander was being questioned by government counsel, it was revealed the applicant self-enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program for a drinking problem and enrolled again for a drug hot. Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed from "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective date 3 June 2008. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 31 days: (AWOL, 3 June 2008 - 3 July 2008) / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided in-service Health Record from 23 March 2007 to 11 September 2007, which reflects the applicant was assessed with: Alcohol Dependence; Bereavement without complications, ruled out Major Depressive Disorder; Occupational Problem; Marital Problem; and Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct. Report of Medical History, dated 10 October 2007, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Relates history of anxiety and depression and relates history of past drug use. Report of Medical Examination, dated 10 October 2007, the examining medical physician noted in the summary of defects and diagnoses section: History of anxiety and depression. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; DD Form 214; Post-Deployment Health Assessment; Report of Medical Assessment; Report of Medical History (two pages); Health Record (in-service); two Certificates of Death; three Obituaries. 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 600-85 defines the Limited Use Policy and states unless waived under the circumstances listed in paragraph 10-13d, Limited Use Policy prohibits the use by the government of protected evidence against a Soldier in actions under the UCMJ or on the issue of characterization of service in administrative proceedings. Additionally, the policy limits the characterization of discharge to "Honorable" if protected evidence is used. Protected evidence under this policy includes: A Soldier's self-referral to BH for SUD treatment and admissions and other information concerning alcohol or other drug abuse or possession of drugs incidental to personal use occurring prior to the date of initial referral to treatment and provided by Soldiers as part of their initial entry into SUD treatment. e. 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. f. 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). g. 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 a 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 PTSD, as well as the deaths of multiple family members, affected behavior and ultimately led to the discharge. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 4 October 2007, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible; could recognized right from wrong; and, cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The MSE does not indicate any diagnosis. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant provided in-service medical records, which indicates the applicant was assessed with: Alcohol Dependence; Bereavement without complications, ruled out Major Depressive Disorder; Occupational Problem; Marital Problem; and Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct. The applicant contends the chain of command did not provide any help with the medical condition. The evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant by providing counseling, leave, and access to medical treatment while on active duty. The AMHRR 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. 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, Alcohol Abuse and Dependence, Bereavements without Complications and PTSD, which, in the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, after applying liberal consideration, could potentially mitigate a discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant has BH diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Alcohol abuse and dependence, Bereavements without Complications, and PTSD that existed during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor opined that the applicant has a partially mitigating diagnosis of PTSD. While applicant's drug usage to manage symptoms and FTR (avoidance) are part of the sequela of symptoms associated with applicant's PTSD, failure to pay debts and lying to a noncommissioned officer do not have a nexus with applicant's PTSD, and therefore are not mitigated. (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, regarding the applicant's PTSD partially mitigating applicant's basis for separation, and as a result, the Board applied liberal consideration, but found that the applicant's PTSD did not outweigh the unmitigated basis for separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends suffering from PTSD, which affected behavior and ultimately led to the discharge. The Board liberally considered this contention, and determined the applicant's PTSD partially mitigated the basis of separation, however the Board voted to grant an upgrade based on inequity when considering applicant's length of service and combat service against the unmitigated basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends the chain of command did not provide any help with the medical condition. The Board considered this contention, but found this contention did not warrant any change to the applicant's discharge because the Board concluded that the Command did not act in an arbitrary or capricious manner throughout the applicant's discharge. In this case, the Board determined that an upgrade was warranted based on the inequity when considering applicant's length of service and combat service against the unmitigated 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. Ultimately, the Board determined the applicant's discharge was inequitable when considering applicant's length of service and combat service against the unmitigated basis for separation. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable when considering applicant's length of service and combat service against the unmitigated 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. The Board determined the RE code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because of the inequity when considering applicant's length of service and combat service against the unmitigated basis for separation. (2) 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 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 / Separation Order: 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 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 AR20210003247 1