1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 May 2021 b. Date Received: 17 June 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is bad-conduct discharge. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, after applicant's first combat tour applicant's mental status would not allow applicant to continue to serve. Applicant was injured while in the military and was experiencing family problems. The applicant has been in and out of mental hospitals due to applicant's post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Applicant fought for this country and now needs help to support applicant's children. In a records review conducted on 14 March 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, after carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and all other evidence presented, the Board determined that clemency is warranted based on the severity of applicant's PTSD and the necessity of a General Characterization to be eligible for PTSD treatment and homelessness assistance from the VA. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by upgrading the applicant's characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. Please see Section 10 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: Court-Martial, Other / AR 635-200, Chapter 3 / JJD / RE-4 / Bad Conduct b. Date of Discharge: 7 June 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Pursuant to Special Court-Martial Empowered to Adjudge a Bad-Conduct Discharge: As announced by Special Court-Martial Order Number 14, dated 14 September 2012, reflects the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty of unlawfully striking W.P. in the head with a closed fist; breaking restriction and being drunk and disorderly on or about 27 November 2011; being absent without authority from his unit on or about 4 December 2011, until being apprehended on or 6 December 2011; failing to go at the prescribed time to his appointed place of duty on two separate occasions; failing to obey a lawful order on or about 16 November 2011; and escaping from confinement on or about 12 December 2011. (2) Adjudged Sentence: Confinement for 3 months and a Bad-Conduct Discharge. (3) Date/Sentence Approved: 24 February 2012, except for that portion of the sentence pertaining to a Bad-Conduct Discharge, will be executed (4) Appellate Reviews: NIF (5) Date Sentence of BCD Ordered Executed: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 11 June 2007 / 3 years / 25 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19D1P / 5 years, 9 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (5 December 2008 - 20 November 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS-1, ASR, OSR, CAB, Parachutist Badge g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Special Court-Martial Order as described in paragraph 3c. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Confinement X 71 days (5 February 2011 - 17 April 2011) / Released j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, Personal Statement, Verification of Disability, Letter from the Department of Veteran Affairs-2, Letters of Support-2 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states they are seeking help and abstaining from alcohol. 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) Section IV establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the ADRB to be established facts, issues relating to the applicant's innocence of charges for which applicant was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the ADRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment. 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's AMHRR record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The Board is empowered to change the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. The applicant contends after applicant's first combat tour applicant's mental status would not allow applicant to continue to serve. The applicant's service record contains no evidence of PTSD or other mental diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant contends being injured while in the military and was experiencing family problems. The applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends having been in and out of mental hospitals due to PTSD. The applicant contends applicant fought for this country and now needs help to support applicant's children. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. 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 DoD and VA medical records, applicant submissions and third party statements, and found the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD and Depressive Disorder NOS, which, in the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, after applying liberal consideration, could potentially mitigate a discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant's diagnoses of Depressive Disorder NOS and PTSD occurred during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor opined that the applicant has a BH condition, PTSD, which mitigates some of applicant's misconduct. As there is an association between PTSD and avoidant behaviors, there is a nexus between the diagnosis of PTSD and applicant's multiple FTRs, breaking of restriction and AWOL. As there is an association between PTSD and difficulties with authority figures, there is a nexus between applicant's PTSD and disobeying an order. As there is an association between PTSD and the use of alcohol to self-medicate symptoms, there is a nexus between applicant's diagnosis of PTSD and being drunk and disorderly. PTSD does not mitigate the offenses of hitting someone in the head with a closed fist or escaping from confinement as these offenses are not part of the natural history or sequelae of PTSD. Specifically, these actions were not spontaneous or unpremeditated; choice of victim (in the case of the assault) was not by accident or chance; the incidents of misconduct themselves reflected motivation and rationalization; the incidents did not relate to applicant's traumatic stressor or event in any way which would suggest a re-enactment and the applicant could speak coherently of applicant's actions before, during and after the event. Accordingly, while Liberal Consideration was applied, the applicant's offenses of assault and escaping confinement are not mitigated. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the Board's application of liberal consideration, the Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that any of the applicant's medical conditions completely outweighed the basis for applicant's separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends after applicant's first combat tour applicant's mental status would not allow applicant to continue to serve. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, ultimately, the Board voted to grant clemency based on the severity of applicant's PTSD and applicant's need for treatment. (2) The applicant contends being injured while in the military and was experiencing family problems. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to clemency being granted based on the severity of applicant's PTSD and applicant's need for treatment. (3) The applicant contends having been in and out of mental hospitals due to PTSD. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, ultimately, the Board voted to grant clemency based on the severity of applicant's PTSD and applicant's need for treatment. (4) The applicant contends applicant fought for this country and now needs help to support applicant's children. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. The Board determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do 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. c. The Board determined after carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and all other evidence presented, the Board determined that clemency is warranted based on the severity of applicant's PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by upgrading the applicant's characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. The applicant has exhausted their appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. 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. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions, because the applicant had PTSD which mitigated the applicant's misconduct of multiple FTRs, breaking of restriction, disobeying an order, being drunk and disorderly and AWOL. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. Despite the seriousness and amount of unmitigated misconduct the board the board granted clemency based on the severity of applicant's PTSD and the necessity of a General Characterization to be eligible for PTSD treatment and homelessness assistance from the VA. (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: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20210015523 7