1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 23 January 2021 b. Date Received: 1 February 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant's Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, when the applicant returned from deployment the applicant began to struggle to sleep, focus, and perform duties. The applicant was having family issues and did not understand what was happening. Prior to the deployment the applicant had honorable service. The applicant was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in September 2018 and began counseling. The applicant contends the discharge was directly related to the PTSD the applicant suffered because of combat. An upgrade would help the applicant purse employment advancement. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 22 September 2023, and by a 4 -1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, post-service accomplishments and the PTSD diagnosis by the BH advisor that partially mitigated the misconduct (Breaking restriction), but not the stolen check. 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, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a corresponding separation code of JKN, and no change to the reentry code. 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 20 January 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 December 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant wrongfully appropriated a blank check, of a value less than $500, the property of SPC E and on or about 28 July 2014, the applicant broke restriction. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 15 December 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 23 December 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 April 2013 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / HS Graduate / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13F10, Fire Support Specialist / 3 years, 8 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 17 May 2010 - 1 April 2013 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (1 November 2012 - 1 July 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 16 July 2014, reflects the applicant wrongfully appropriated a blank check, of a value of about $140, the property of SPC E. The punishment consisted of reduction to private/E-1 and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. CG Article 15, dated 29 September 2014, reflects the applicant broke restriction on or about 28 July 2014. The punishment consisted if reduction to private/E-2; forfeiture of $404 pay, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 15 April 2015; and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. A Report of Mental Status Evaluation (MSE), dated 7 August 2014, reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and could appreciate the difference between right and wrong. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: The applicant provides a letter from the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) which reflects the applicant was granted a service-connected evaluation of PTSD, previously rated as adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, with a 50 percent disability rating. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, personal statement, VA Letter, DD Form 214, Power of Attorney 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is employed as a DoD employee. 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), dated 25 September 2019, 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 14-12b, addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. (7) Chapter 15 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, pattern of misconduct. 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 and a narrative reason change. The applicant's Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests the narrative reason for the discharge be changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is "JKA." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs the preparation of the DD Form 214, and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be listed in tables 2-2 or 2-2 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends, in effect, when the applicant returned from deployment the applicant began to struggle to sleep, focus, and perform duties. The applicant was having family issues and did not understand what was happening. The applicant states the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD in September 2018 and began counseling. The applicant contends the discharge was directly related to the PTSD the applicant suffered because of combat. The applicant's AMHRR is void of a PTSD diagnosis. The records show the applicant underwent a MSE on 7 August 2014, which reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and could appreciate the difference between right and wrong. The MSE does not list any mental health diagnoses. The applicant provides a letter from VA, dated 4 September 2018, which reflects the applicant was granted a service-connected evaluation of PTSD, previously rated as adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, with a 50 percent disability rating. The applicant states prior to the deployment the applicant had honorable service. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant states an upgrade would help the applicant purse employment advancement. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. 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 was diagnosed in- service with an Adjustment Disorder secondary to psychosocial stressors. The applicant is service connected for combat related PTSD, initially Adjustment Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant was diagnosed in-service with an Adjustment Disorder secondary to psychosocial stressors. The applicant was initially service connected with an Adjustment Disorder affirming this was the accurate in-service diagnosis. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor determined that the medical conditions do not mitigate the basis for separation. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that there is no nexus between the diagnoses and misconduct; wrongfully appropriating a blank check takes thought not indicative of impairment. Rather, this was related to a self-reported gambling problem unrelated to deployment. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the condition or experience outweighed the basis of separation. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant contends when the applicant returned from deployment the applicant began to struggle to sleep, focus, and perform duties. The applicant was having family issues and did not understand what was happening. The applicant states the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD in September 2018 and began counseling. The applicant contends the discharge was directly related to the PTSD the applicant suffered because of combat. The Board considered this contention and determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service based on the partial mitigation, the applicant's length, quality, combat, honorable and post service accomplishments, the overall service mitigated the remaining misconduct, making the current discharge inequitable and warranted an upgrade c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable and 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, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a corresponding separation code of JKN, and no change to the reentry code. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD mitigated the applicant's misconduct of breaking restriction. 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 pretext, 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 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 AR20210007948 1