1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 7 October 2020 b. Date Received: 13 October 2020 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant’s Requests and Issues: (1) The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade of their character of service, separation code, re-entry code, and narrative reason for separation. (2) The applicant seeks relief stating they have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), service-connected at 100- percent. At the time of their separation, they had just returned from an imminent danger area, a deployment to Afghanistan, and was showing signs of PTSD with depressed mood, anxiety, sleep disturbance, that went untreated. They asked multiple times to be evaluated and seen by mental health and was told no. They had received no other administrative disciplinary action prior to their deployment, and they feel as though the incident for which they were separated was a direct cause their mental health condition. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 29 November 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 15 April 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 March 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: committed simple assault consummated by battery, committed domestic battery, and was disrespectful in language toward a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 11 March 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 March 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 October 2013 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 89B10, Ammunition Specialist / 2 years, 6 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / Afghanistan (13 August 2013 – 17 November 2013 f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, GWTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) A Military Police Report, dated 10 May 2013, reflects the applicant was arrested for Domestic Battery and Criminal Restraint (Off Post) on 9 May 2013. (2) A DA Form 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form), dated 10 May 2013, reflects the applicant received event-oriented counseling in which they were arrested for criminal restraint and domestic battery on or about 9 May 2013. (3) A DA Form 4856, dated 20 October 2013, reflects the applicant was being recommended to the command for Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) actions for misconduct, in which they disobeyed a lawful order and used threatening speech or gestures towards a superior NCO. (4) An Enlisted Record Brief reflects the applicant deployed to Afghanistan from 13 August 2013 through 17 November 2013. (5) A DA Form 4856, dated 8 January 2014, reflects the applicant received event- oriented counseling, in which they were arrested for two counts of abuse, on or about 8 January 2014. (6) A Military Police Report, dated 9 January 2014, reflects the applicant was arrested for Simple Assault - Consummated by a Battery (UCMJ 128) (On Post) on 8 January 2014. (7) A memorandum, E Troop, 1st Squadron, 6th Cavalry Regiment subject: No Contact Order, dated 10 January 2014, the applicant's company commander ordered the applicant to have no contact with SPC A.G. and any members of her family while applicant is under investigation for applicant's alleged conduct. (8) A memorandum, E Troop, 1st Squadron, 6th Cavalry Regiment subject: No Contact Order, dated 10 January 2014, the applicant's company commander ordered the applicant to have no contact with SPC N.M. and any members of her family while applicant is under investigation for applicant's alleged conduct. (9) A DA Form 4856, dated 13 January 2014, reflects the applicant was informed of the initiation of a FLAG for involuntary separation. (10) A DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 15 January 2014, the applicant marked "No" to all entries for "Have you ever had, or do you now have" to a listing of conditions, and the applicant wrote "Healthy." On a DD Form 2697 (Report of Medical Assessment), dated 15 January 2014, the applicant indicated they have chronic right shoulder pain since October 2013, but the actual injury occurred 2 weeks ago. (11) A DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation) dated 16 January 2014, reflects the applicant's disposition from a behavioral health standpoint is fit for duty. The applicant can understand and participated in administrative proceedings, can appreciate the difference between right and wrong and meets medical retention requirements (i.e., does not qualify for a Medical Evaluation Board). (a) Section IV (Diagnosis) reflects the Behavioral Health diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Mood Emotional Features, Family Problems. (b) Section VIII (Additional Comments) the Behavioral Health Provider states the Service Member (SM) manifests a long-standing, chronic pattern of difficulty adjusting as characterized by at least two separate instances of maladaptive reaction to identifiable stressful life events. The SM has been screened for PTSD and Traumatic Brain Injury. These conditions are either not present or, if present, does not meet the criteria for a Medical Evaluation Board. SM's use of alcohol has increased in the recent past. SM is aware that they will be asked to limit use of alcohol as part of further behavioral health treatment. No ASAP referral required at this time. SM is cleared for separation. SM has behavior health follow up appointments. SM is aware that he can access behavioral health crisis care via this clinic or Emergency Department of this hospital. (12) A DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ), dated 27 January 2014, reflects the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for, disrespectful in language towards a senior NCO, on or about 20 October 2013. The applicant's punishment consisted of a reduction to the rank/grade of private first class/E-3, forfeiture of $447.00 pay, and 14 days of restriction. (13) A DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination), dated 27 January 2014, reflects the applicant is qualified for service. In item 77 (Summary of Defects and Diagnoses) the examining physician indicated acne and right shoulder pain. (14) A memorandum, E Troop, 1st Squadron, 6th Cavalry Regiment subject: Separation under Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, (Commission of Serious Offense) [Applicant], 11 March 2014, the applicant’s company commander notified the applicant of their intent to separate them under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14- 12c, Commission of a Serious Offense with a recommended characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) for, simple assault consummated by battery, domestic battery, and disrespectful in language towards a superior NCO. On the same day the applicant acknowledged the basis for the separation and of the right available to them. (15) Headquarters, 1st Infantry Division and Fort Riley, memorandum (Separation under the Provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, (Commission of Serious Offense) [Applicant]), 20 March 2014, the separation authority directed the applicant will be separated from the Army prior to the expiration of current term of service and the applicant's service will be characterized as General (Under Honorable Conditions). (16) On 15 April 2014, the applicant was discharged accordingly, the DD Form 214 provides the applicant completed 2 years, 6 months, and 25 days of net active service this period. Item 18 (Remarks) shows – * Continuous Honorable Active Service – 20110921 – 20121003 * Member has Completed First Full Term of Service [Note - They completed 6 months, and 12 days of their 3-year reenlistment contractual obligation] i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: * DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge) * VA Letter, reflecting the applicant's summary of benefits with a combined service- connected evaluation of 100-percent 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with application. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1553, (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, Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 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 (DoD) 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; Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1553; and DoD Directive 1332.41 and DoD Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), 6 September 2011, provided the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) 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. (2) 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. (3) A Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable. It may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Chapter 14 (Separation for Misconduct) established policy and prescribed procedures for separating members for misconduct. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. 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. Paragraph 14-12c (Misconduct, Serious Offense), stated, commission of a serious military or civil 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. (5) Chapter 15 (Secretarial Plenary Authority), currently in effect, 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 memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. 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 DoD Instructions 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: (1) RE-1 Applies to: Person completing his or her term of active service who is considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army. Eligibility: Qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met. (2) 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. (3) RE-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. g. Title 38, U.S. Code, Sections 1110 and 1131, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge, or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by the agency. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): a. The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by DoD Instruction 1332.28. b. The applicant's AMHRR contains the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. The applicant received developmental counseling for being arrested for criminal restraint, domestic battery and two counts of abuse. The applicant received nonjudicial punishment for disrespectful language toward a senior NCO. A properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature which provides the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant received a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service rather than a under other than honorable conditions which is normally considered appropriate. c. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separation members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and convictions by civil authorities. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. 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. d. The AMHRR does not provide documentation of a diagnosis of a PTSD diagnosis during the applicant's term of service. e. Published DoD guidance indicates that the guidance is not intended to interfere or impede on the Board's statutory independence. The Board will determine the relative weight of the action that led to the discharge and whether it supports relief or not. In reaching its determination, the Board shall consider the applicant's petition, available records and/or submitted documents in support of the petition. 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 the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses: the applicant held an in- service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with FAP involvement pre- and post-deployment as well as post-service as an offender. Post-service connected for PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant held an in-service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with FAP involvement pre- and post-deployment as well as post-service as an offender. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that documentation does not support the applicant was experiencing trauma symptoms at the time of the misconduct, to include the applicant’s own denial and IPV pattern originating prior to deployment. Rather, the applicant’s history pre-deployment through post-service reflects characterological difficulties which includes aggression toward others. While characterological difficulties may provide context, they are not mitigating as the individual is able to still make choices understanding the consequences and not experiencing a mental defect. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the applicant’s in- service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with FAP involvement pre- and post-deployment as well as post-service as an offender and post-service connected for PTSD did not outweigh the basis of separation. b. Prior Decisions Cited: None c. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends they have been diagnosed with PTSD by the VA with service connection at 100-percent. The Board liberally considered all of the applicant’s medical conditions but found those potentially mitigating behavioral health conditions did not outweigh the basis for applicant’s separation. (2) The applicant contends they asked multiple times to be evaluated and seen by mental health and was told no. The Board considered the applicant's contention and found that totality of the applicant's record does not warrant a discharge upgrade. (3) The applicant contends they had received no other administrative disciplinary action prior to their deployment, and they feel as though the incident for which they were separated was a direct cause their mental health condition. The Board considered this contention and determined the applicant’s history pre-deployment through post-service reflects characterological difficulties which includes aggression toward others. While characterological difficulties may provide context, they are not mitigating as the individual is able to still make choices understanding the consequences and not experiencing a mental defect. (a) Neither the AMHRR nor the applicant provide evidence that shows PTSD. (b) Although the applicant submitted a copy of a VA disability rating. Disabilities which occur or which worsen after a Soldier is separated are treated by and compensated for by the VA. Any claims or issues concerning treatment or compensation for service-connected disabilities should be addressed to that Agency. Title 38, United States Code, permits the VA to award compensation for disabilities which were incurred in or aggravated by active military service. Title 38, United States Code, permits the VA to award compensation for disabilities which were incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA can evaluate a veteran throughout his or her lifetime, adjusting the percentage of disability based upon that agency's examinations and findings. d. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant’s contention) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. e. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board carefully considered the applicant's request, supporting documents, evidence in the records, a medical review, and published Department of Defense guidance for liberal consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant's statement, record of service, the frequency and nature of misconduct, and the reason for separation. The Board found insufficient evidence of any in-service mitigating factors and concurred with the conclusion of the medical advising official that the applicant's PTSD does not mitigate the applicant's misconduct (committed simple assault consummated by battery, committed domestic battery, and was disrespectful in language toward a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO)). Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the reason for the applicant's separation and the character of service the applicant received upon separation were proper and equitable. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (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: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. 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 AR20210005282 1