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, he believes his current discharge status did not properly consider all the medical conditions he sustained from his honorable service, such as: spinal stenosis; aggravated prior left arm dislocation; and, his prior visit with the psychiatrist for the VA for his PTSD and other minor medical conditions. The applicant was not given the opportunity to correct the issues, and his command did not consider these conditions prior to filing his separation papers. The applicant believes the undiagnosed PTSD affected him and was compounded by his other medical conditions, which were severe enough to have affected him during his last few years of his contract. The applicant's condition separated his connection with his current command, which was not the same command he was deployed with. His previous command would have understood and identified the change had affected his mental state to a point where it was very difficult for him to readjust back to civilian everyday life; and, overall changed him from the Soldier he was to the Soldier he became. Statements from his family support the change in his behavior. The applicant states, he is not the type of person to just seek medical attention and was not aware of how severely PTSD had affected him or the severity of which it could affect him. He did not seek help or was able to identify the problems he sustained and he believes his current command just wanted to expedite his separation instead of helping him identify and ultimately fix the issues. Prior to this, before and during deployment his service was characterized as exceptional. Because of the military service and the things learned while in service, the applicant has been able to find success outside the military, such as receiving multiple awards and promotions due to his work. In a records review conducted on 17 March 2022, the Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant had a BH condition which mitigated the applicant's misconduct of missed Reserve drill weekends. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. 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: NIF / AR 135-178 / NIF / NIF / NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 20 February 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 March 2006 / 8 years USAR b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist d. Prior Service / Characterizations: IADT, 29 June 2006 - 22 November 2006 / UNC (Concurrent Service) AD, 19 April 2007 - 22 May 2008 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait (25 June 2007 - 23 April 2008) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR, AFRMMD g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Memorandum, dated 14 October 2010, reflects the command reduced the applicant from E-3 to E-2 for accumulating nine unexcused absences within a year time frame. Orders 10-288-01, dated 15 October 2010, reflects the applicant was reduced from PFC to PV2 effective 15 October 2010, for Unsatisfactory participation. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his VA benefits decision stating he was rated at 50 percent for PTSD. The applicant provided progress notes, dated 29 July 2021, reflecting the patient reported some symptoms of depression. Symptoms are not consistent with a major depressive episode. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; self-authored statement; VA rating decision; Two Certificates of Achievement; Orders 11-047-00116; Progress notes. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has been able to find success outside the military such as receiving multiple awards and promotions for his work. 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 135-178 sets forth the policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. The separation policies throughout the different Chapters in this regulation promote the readiness of the Army by providing an orderly means to judge the suitability of persons to serve on the basis of their conduct and their ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities. (1) Paragraph 2-7, prescribes possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general (under honorable conditions), under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. (2) Paragraph 2-8, prescribes the characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldier's service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization. Chapter 13, provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army's best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary's approved designee as announced in updated memorandums. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. 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 AMHRR is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the applicant's discharge from the Army Reserve. The applicant's AMHRR does contain a properly constituted discharge order: Orders 18-122-00034, dated 2 May 2018. The orders indicate the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-178, with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests a narrative reason change and an RE Code change. Orders are published when service members are discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve, which indicate the effective date and characterization of the discharge. Narrative reasons and RE Codes usually are not included in the order. In insomuch as the applicant's discharge order does not have these elements, the ADRB has no basis for changing the discharge order. If the applicant desires to rejoin the military, local recruiters can determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility. The applicant contends his undiagnosed PTSD affected his behavior and was the reason for his discharge. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant provided a copy of his VA benefits decision stating he was rated at 50 percent for PTSD to support his contention. The applicant provided progress notes, dated 29 July 2021, reflecting the patient reported some symptoms of depression. Symptoms were not consistent with a major depressive episode. The applicant contends he was not given the opportunity to correct the issues, and his command did not consider this prior to filing his separation papers. 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 the applicant's DOD and VA health records and determined the applicant's PTSD may mitigate unexcused absences that were the basis for separation. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found applicant service connected by the VA for PTSD. Service connection establishes that the PTSD existed during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor opined that the applicant's PTSD mitigates the basis for separation (missing drill formations) because of the nexus between applicant's PTSD and avoidance. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB concurred with the Board's Medical Advisor, and determined that the PTSD outweighed the mitigated basis of separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends his undiagnosed PTSD affected his behavior and was the reason for his discharge. The Board liberally considered this contention and determined the applicant's PTSD outweighed the applicant's mitigated basis for separation (missing drill formations). (2) The applicant contends he was not given the opportunity to correct the issues, and his command did not consider this prior to filing his separation papers. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's PTSD outweighing the applicant's mitigated missed drill formations as the 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. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD which mitigated the applicant's misconduct of missed Reserve drill weekends. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to Honorable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD outweighed the applicant's mitigated misconduct of missed drill formations. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) There is no narrative reason, SPD code or RE-code listed on the applicant's discharge paperwork, due to being in the Army Reserves, no upgrade actions are required for this item. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New Separation Order: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. 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 AR20210003413 1