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, due to mental health conditions and related behavioral traits, the applicant's duty performance was severely affected. Depression, Anxiety, PTSD, and Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) was diagnosed at the Madigan Army Medical Center at Joint Base Lewis McChord, Washington. These disorders affected her ability to perform duties and maintain appropriate relationships in the workplace. The reasoning for her discharge was based on circumstances created by the applicant's mental health conditions. In a records review conducted on 10 March 2022, and by a 3 - 2 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable because applicant's pre-service sexual trauma that was exacerbated by military service outweighed the basis for applicant's 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 23 January 2019 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 January 2019 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: between on or about 23 February 2018 and on or about 6 May 2018, the applicant wrongfully engaged in multiple sexual intercourses with SGT N., a married man not her husband; between on or about 23 February 2018 and on or about 6 May 2018, the applicant violated Army Regulation 600-20, dated 6 November 2014, by entering a sexual relationship with a noncommissioned officer; and between on or about 27 February 2018 and on or about 6 May 2018, she violated a lawful order given by SFC L., to only contact noncommissioned officers in connection with the performance of duties or functions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 9 January 2019, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: Offer to Plead Guilty, dated 16 October 2018, reflects the applicant offered to plead guilty to Charge I and II and the specifications; and, conditionally waived her right to contest an administrative separation board in whole or in part on the conduct to which she is pleading guilty provided she received a discharge no less favorable than General (Under Honorable Conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 January 2019 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 June 2017 / 3 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / GED / 114 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist / 1 year, 7 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Department of Defense Report of Result of Trial, reflects the applicant was charged with: Violation of Article 92, UCMJ, for, at or around Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, from on or about 23 February 2018 to on or about 6 May 2018, violate a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 4-14, Army Regulation 600-20, dated 6 November 2014, by entering a sexual relationship with a noncommissioned officer. Violation of Article 92, for having knowledge of a lawful order issued by SFC L., to only contact NCOs in connection with the performance of her duties or functions, an order which it was her duty to obey, did, at or around Joint Base Lewis-McChord from on or about 27 February 2018 to on or about 6 May 2018, fail to obey the same by continuing inappropriate communication with SGT N. Violation of Article 134, UCMJ, for a married woman, did, at or around Joint Base Lewis McChord, WA, from on or about 23 February 2018 to on or about 6 May 2018, wrongfully have sexual intercourse with SGT N., a married man not her husband, such conduct being to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces. Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial, reflects the applicant was charged with: Two specifications of violation of Article 92: Plead Guilty One specification of violation of Article 134: Plead Guilty The sentenced adjudged: Reduction to E-1. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 10 December 2018, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Behavioral Health Note dated 28 June 2018 reflects, Adjustment Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood; Nightmare disorder and other specified family circumstances sexual assault. Service member with history of trauma symptoms stemming from rape at age 17 by a friend and abuse by an uncle for the span of two years, ending when the applicant leaving home at age 21. The applicant with increased report of depression and anxiety, complicated by self-report of missing periods of time. Office and Clinic notes dated 7 November 2018 reflects Behavioral Health Diagnosis of Borderline Personality Diagnosis. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 and medical documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with 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 14-12a addresses minor disciplinary infractions, defined as a pattern of misconduct, consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. (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. 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 due to mental health conditions and related behavioral traits, the applicant's duty performance was severely affected. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The applicant did submit evidence to support the contention the discharge resulted from a medical condition. The applicant provided Behavioral Health Note, dated 28 June 2018, which reflects, Adjustment Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood; Nightmare disorder and other specified family circumstances sexual assault; Office and Clinic notes, dated 7 November 2018, reflects Behavioral Health Diagnosis of Borderline Personality Diagnosis. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 10 December 2018, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and recognized right from wrong. The MSE does not indicate any diagnosis. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends the reason for her discharge was based on circumstances created by the applicant's mental health conditions. The applicant at her trial expressly disclaimed, any defense to the charges and specifications to which she has pleaded guilty. Defense counsel and the applicant had discussed all possible defenses and agreed no defenses applied. The applicant was mentally responsible at all times during the course of her misconduct and had been competent to comprehend the proceedings against her and assist meaningfully in her own defense. She was fully capable of understanding the nature and wrongfulness of her actions. She had no legal excuse or justification for her crimes. 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 and found the applicant was diagnosed with a Depressive Disorder and Active duty medical record reveals an extensive pre-service history of sexual trauma symptoms that were exacerbated by military service 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 found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with a Depressive Disorder that is also service connected by the VA and Active duty medical record reveals an extensive pre-service history of sexual trauma symptoms that were exacerbated by military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor opined, after applying liberal consideration, that the applicant's trauma from pre-service sexual trauma was exacerbated by military service, and mitigated the misconduct that led to her separation given applicant's sexual trauma led to applicant's impulsive and sexually inappropriate relationships. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The majority of the Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the applicant's pre-service history of sexual trauma fully mitigated applicant's wrongfully engaging in multiple sexual intercourses with a married man not her husband; entering a sexual relationship with a noncommissioned officer; and violating a lawful order to only contact noncommissioned officers in connection with the performance of duties or functions for the reasons listed in (3) above. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the BH conditions outweighed the basis for separation. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends due to mental health conditions and related behavioral traits, the applicant duty performance was severely affected. The Board considered this contention during proceedings and concluded that applicant's pre-service history of sexual trauma that was exacerbated by military service mitigated applicant's basis of separation misconduct and voted to upgrade the characterization of service. (2) The applicant contends the reason for her discharge was based on circumstances created by the applicant's mental health conditions. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to applicant's pre-service history of sexual trauma mitigating the misconduct that led to applicant's separation. c. The majority of the Board determined the discharge is inequitable because applicant's pre-service sexual trauma that was exacerbated by military service outweighed the basis for applicant's separation. . d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The majority of the Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's pre-service history of sexual trauma was exacerbated by military service and as a result outweighed the applicant's misconduct of wrongfully engaging in multiple sexual intercourses with a married man not her husband; entering a sexual relationship with a noncommissioned officer; and violating a lawful order to only contact noncommissioned officers in connection with the performance of duties or functions. (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 AR20210003301 3