1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 March 2021 b. Date Received: 25March 2021 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests, through counsel, an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's counsel further requests a copy of the applicant's treatment records and personnel file. The applicant's counsel seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant was experiencing post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) during service. The applicant has since been diagnosed with PTSD stemming from military service. The applicant has a 50-percent disability rating for service- connected PSTD by the Department of Veteran Affairs. In a records review conducted on 1 December 2021, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was inequitable due to the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD). 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, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 17 July 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 March 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant was absent without leave from 9 July 2014, until she was apprehended on 10 October 2014. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 March 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant unconditionally waived her rights to an administrative separation board according to an agreement to dismiss charges made between the applicant and the government on 5 February 2015. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 29 June 2015 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 October 2012 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / HS Graduate / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 6 years, 5 months, 2 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 7 October 2010 - 30 September 2012 / HD ARNG, 31 August 2008 - 6 October 2010 / HD RA, 19 January 2009 - 19 June 2009 / HD (IADT) (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Afghanistan (16 July 2011 to 16 June 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AAM-2; AGCM; ACM-CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR- 2; NATOMDL; MUC g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 11 July 2014, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for desertion and AWOL offenses. Agreement to Dismiss Charges, dated 5 February 2015, indicates the applicant, as an accused, agreed to unconditionally waive her right to an administrative separation board, and to plead guilty at a FG Article 15 hearing to two specifications of AWOL charge, and as consideration, the government agreed to dismiss the preferred charges without prejudice and become prejudice upon her discharge, with stipulations. FG Article 15, dated 4 March 2015, for being AWOL on 9 July 2014, until 10 October 2014. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $773 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty. Report of Mental Status Evaluation (MSE), dated 6 February 2015, reflects the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and could appreciate the difference between right and wrong. The MSE provided no diagnosis and cleared the applicant for Chapter 14-12c consideration. The applicant was counseled on multiple occasions for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 108 days (AWOL: 8 March 2014 to 13 March 2014, for 7 days, 9 July 2014 to 17 October 2014, for 101 days) / Apprehended by civil authorities. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provides a letter from the Department of Veteran Affairs, dated 10 October 2018, which reflects the applicant was granted a 50-percent disability rating for PTSD effective 18 July 2015. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, DD Form 214, Counsel's Brief, Letter from the Department of Veteran Affairs, dated 10 October 2018, Character Statement, Privacy Act Request 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Counsel states the applicant is receiving treatment for PTSD from the VA Medical Center in Memphis, TN. 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) Paragraph 3-7c states Under other-than-honorable-conditions discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable and it may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial based on certain circumstances or patterns of behavior or acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. (5) 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. (6) 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. (7) Paragraph 14-12a addresses minor disciplinary infractions, defined as a pattern of misconduct, consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. (8) Paragraph 14-12c, states 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant's AMHRR record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests, through counsel, an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's counsel further requests a copy of the applicant's treatment records and personnel file. The applicant's counsel contends the applicant was experiencing PTSD during service and has since been diagnosed with PTSD stemming from military service by the Department of Veteran Affairs. The applicant's counsel provided a letter from the Department of Veteran Affairs, dated 10 October 2018, which reflects the applicant was granted a 50-percent disability rating for PTSD effective 18 July 2015. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a MSE on 6 February 2015, which indicates the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and could appreciate the difference between right and wrong. The MSE does not indicate any diagnosis. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The third party statement provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance and character. However, the person providing the character reference statement was not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. The applicant's counsel requests a copy of the applicant medical and personnel records. The counsel's request does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant's counsel may request copies of the applicant's official records to include medical records through the National Archives. To gain more information on how to request records, the applicant may visit the http://www.archives.gov/veterans/military-service-records or seek assistance through a Veterans' Service Organization. 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. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with PTSD, a potentially mitigating condition. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board arrived at this finding based upon the fact that the VA has found the applicant to be 50% service connected for PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. As there is an association between PTSD and avoidant behaviors, there is a nexus between applicant's diagnosis of PTSD and her periods of AWOL, all of which occurred post-deployment. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The applicant's condition of PTSD is mitigating and outweighs the AWOL basis for discharge. b. The applicant's counsel contends the applicant was experiencing PTSD during service and has since been diagnosed with PTSD stemming from military service by the Department of Veteran Affairs. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to PTSD mitigating the applicant's AWOL charges. c. The Board determined that the discharge was inequitable due to the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD). d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant had PTSD which mitigated the applicant's misconduct for AWOL. 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 AR20210008648 3