1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 18 May 2020 b. Date Received: 6 April 2021 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 to honorable. (2) The applicant states at the time of their discharge the military offered early discharge options, although their DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) states they have a general (under honorable conditions) characterization, with a reason for separation as "pattern of misconduct," they opted for an early discharge option. (3) They joined the military for the education assistance benefit. They have served over 3 years and would like to receive their education assistance benefit so they can continue to improve their life, educational achievement, and career advancement. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 18 October 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: Pattern of Misconduct / Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12B / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 February 2013 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: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 January 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 November 2009 / 6 years, 25 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: Specialist/E-4 / 92F1O, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 3 years, 3 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (8 February 2011 – 4 December 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) On 24 August 2011, the applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for exceptionally meritorious service during Operation New Dawn from 7 February 2011 to 6 February 2012. The applicant's ranks is shown as specialist/E-4. (2) A review of the applicant Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) fails to show adverse action; however, the applicant's DD Form 214 reflects the applicant's reduction in rank to private first class, effective 22 May 2012. (3) The applicant's separation packet provides only the separation authority's memorandum, subject: Separation under Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b, A Patter of Misconduct, [Applicant], dated 9 January 2013, that shows approval discharge from the Army prior to the expiration of current term of service with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. Additionally, it the shows the applicant would not be transferred to the IRR and the rehabilitative requirement was waived indicating it would not serve a useful purpose or produce a quality, Soldier. (4) On 26 February 2013, the applicant was discharged accordingly, the DD Form 214 provides the applicant completed 3 years, 3 months, and 17 days of net active service, not completing their first full term of service of 6 years and 25 weeks. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): None (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge) 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the 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 Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), 6 September 2011, set policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the force while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Soldiers for a variety of reasons. Readiness is promoted by maintaining high standards of conduct and performance. (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) Chapter 1 (General Provisions) sets policies, standards, and procedures to ensure readiness and competency of the force while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Soldiers; it provides in pertinent part: (a) When a separation is ordered, the approved proceedings will be sent to the commander who has the Soldiers records for separation processing. The original copy of the proceedings will be filed in the permanent part of the Soldiers official personnel record. (b) Army leaders at all levels must be continually aware of their obligation to provide purpose, direction, and motivation to Soldiers. It is essential that Soldiers who falter, but have the potential to serve honorably and well, be given every opportunity to succeed. Except as otherwise indicated, commanders must make maximum use of counseling and rehabilitation before determining that a Soldier has no potential for further useful service and ensure it occurs prior to initiating separation proceedings for reasons to include Minor Disciplinary Infractions (14-12a) or a Pattern of Misconduct (14-12b). (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 14-12b (Pattern of Misconduct), stated, a pattern of misconduct consisting of one of the following – discreditable involvement with civil 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 civil law, and time- honored customs and traditions of the Army. (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 “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). 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. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): a. The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. b. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. Review of the AMHRR provides administrative irregularity in the proper retention of records, specifically, aside from the separation authority approval memorandum and a properly constituted DD Form 214, which was authenticated by the applicant's signature., the record is void of the entire separation proceedings. Based on the this we are unable to provide the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the misconduct that led to the applicant being discharged. c. The available evidence provides a waiver for rehabilitative requirements was approved and the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) rather than an Under Other than Honorable conditions which is normally considered appropriate. They completed 3 years, 3 months, and 17 days of their 6 year and 25-week contractual obligation. d. 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. 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/experiences: PTSD (30%SC). (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found VA service connection establishes condition occurred during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? N/A. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that, due to the lack of a basis of separation, the Agency BH Advisor can render no opinion regarding medical mitigation under liberal consideration. (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 condition or experience did not outweigh the basis of separation b. Prior Decisions Cited: None c. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends at the time of their discharge the military offered early discharge options, although their DD Form 214 states they have a general (under honorable conditions) characterization, with a reason for separation as "pattern of misconduct," they opted for an early discharge option. However, a review of the applicant's AMHRR provides no evidence of an option for an early release from active duty, nor did the applicant provide evidence of the same. The Board considered this contention and determined that a change to the applicant’s characterization of service/RE code is not warranted due to the lack of information in the applicant’s records to support this contention. (2) The applicant contends an upgrade would allow educational benefits. Eligibility for veteran’s benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. Additionally, the ADRB does not grant requests for upgrade of discharges solely for the purpose of making the applicant eligible for veterans' benefits. a. The Board determined the separation was both proper and equitable. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address further 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(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. b. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s characterization of service because, due to the lack of a basis of separation, the Agency’s BH Advisor can render no opinion regarding medical mitigation under liberal consideration. Based on the non-BH mitigation of the misconduct and the lack of information on the basis of separation; the current discharge is appropriate. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. (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. 2. 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 AR20210011761 1