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, service for almost 18 years all over the world and 11 deployments which took their toll on a career ended up costing a marriage. The applicant had an injury to the right leg, while serving in Delta Force, which changed the applicant's life and since, has never been able to walk without pain. All of these factors, along with a very hostile divorce, put the applicant in a mental strain where the applicant never recovered. The applicant's last unit put the applicant on three back to back deployments which were severely straining along with a divorce and PTSD. The applicant served as a CJSOTF 1SG in Qatar and stood up the SOJTF-OIR J6 as the first Senior Enlisted Leader, all while losing kids and being mentally attacked. In a records review conducted on 29 March 2022, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service and prior periods of honorable service. 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: 13 July 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 16 November 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 30 May 2016, while deployed and under the influence of alcohol, the applicant attempted to force the applicant's way into a female Sailor quarters. The applicant was detained and administered a chemical breath test revealing a blood alcohol content of .12 percent. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 March 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 9 February 2018, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of rights. On 3 March 2018, the applicant conditionally waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board, contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 20 April 2018, the applicant's conditional waiver was approved. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 April 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 April 2012 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / Bachelor's Degree / 118 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-8 / 25U5S 2S Signal Support System Specialist / 17 years, 8 months, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 26 October 2000 - 2 May 2005 / HD RA, 3 May 2005 - 10 May 2007 / HD RA, 11 May 2007 - 23 April 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, Italy, SWA / Afghanistan (20 August 2002 - 16 November 2002; 24 February 2005 - 23 February 2006; 9 May 2007 - 21 July 2008; 11 April 2012 - 11 September 2012); Burkina Faso (28 August 2013 - 31 October 2013); Libya (15 February 2014 - 11 March 2014); Iraq (26 March 2003 - 24 March 2004); Qatar (24 March 2015 - 13 May 2015; 7 July 2015 - 8 October 2015; 27 January 2016 - 3 June 2016) f. Awards and Decorations: BSM-2, MSM, JSCM-3, ARCOM-6, JSAM-3, JMUA-3, MUC, VUA, ASUA, AGCM-5, GWOTEM-2, GWOTSM, ACM-3CS, HSM, ICM-CS, NCOPDR-3, OSR- 5, MOVSM, NATOMDL, CAB, AAM-3, ASR, NDSM g. Performance Ratings: 1 February 2012 - 7 July 2012 / Among the Best 7 July 2012 - 10 January 2013 / Among the Best 11 January 2013 - 10 January 2014 / NIF 11 January 2014 - 22 May 2014 / NIF 23 May 2014 - 12 March 2015 / Among the Best 13 March 2015 - 31 December 2015 / Among the Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 5 January 2017, for disorderly conduct and attempted unlawful entry. On 30 May 2016, while deployed and under the influence of alcohol, the applicant attempted to force way into a female Sailor quarters without authority. The applicant was detained and administered a chemical breath test revealing a blood alcohol content of .12 percent. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 12 October 2017, 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. The applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and depressed mood. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; Privacy Authorization Release Form; FY16 USASMA Training and Selection List; Enlisted Record Brief; nine character reference letters. 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 14-12a 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 having PTSD. The applicant's AMHRR contains documentation which supports a diagnosis of in-service depression. The record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 12 October 2017, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and was able to recognize right from wrong. The applicant was diagnosed with: Anxiety and depressed mood. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends family issues affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends good service, including numerous combat tours. 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 the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has potentially-mitigating BH diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found in-service BH diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder and Anxiety Disorder, and applicant is service-connected by the VA for PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. After reviewing the available information and in accordance liberal consideration guidance, it is the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor that although the applicant has a BH diagnosis of PTSD, this is not a mitigating factor for the misconduct of attempting to forcibly enter a female Sailor's quarters, as this behavior is not part of the sequela of symptoms associated with PTSD. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the Board's application of liberal consideration, the Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that any of the applicant's medical conditions completely outweighed the basis for applicant's separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends having PTSD. The ADRB is not bound by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decisions. There is no law or regulation which requires that an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the Board determination that there was a condition or experience that existed during the applicant's time in service. The Board must also articulate the nexus between that condition or experience and the basis for separation. Then, the Board must determine that the condition or experience outweighed the basis for separation. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former service member is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the ARBA when determining a member's discharge characterization. In this case, the Board determined that applicant's PTSD is not a mitigating factor for the misconduct of attempting to forcibly enter a female Sailor's quarters, as this behavior is not part of the sequela of symptoms associated with PTSD. (2) The applicant contends family issues affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. The Board took the severe family matters into consideration during deliberations, and used that in addition to other factors to determine that relief was warranted. (3) The applicant contends good service, including numerous combat tours. The Board took this contention into consideration during deliberations, and used the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, in addition to other factors to determine that relief was warranted. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service and prior periods of honorable service, and severe family matters. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's length and quality of service, to include multiple combat deployments and prior periods of honorable service, outweighed the offense of attempted forcible entry. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (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: 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 AR20210003383 1