1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 9 November 2021 b. Date Received: 9 November 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 seeks relief stating they signed out on leave from 20 December 2019 through 5 January 2020, when they got into a verbal altercation with the mother of their child. The applicant's sergeant told them that if they didn't come in to work that they would be considered Absent Without Leave (AWOL); however, the applicant knew he was on leave. When they signed in from leave, they received a counseling statement and was being considered for nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice. (3) They spoke to a legal representative which told them, that since they requested a board [trial by court-martial] they would be in the Army longer than their expiration of term of service (ETS). Their legal representative asked them if they wanted to request a general discharge instead of possible dealing with a dishonorable discharge, they agreed and they were discharged one day before their ETS. After they were discharged, they found out that they could not be held in the Army for longer than their original ETS date unless they were facing criminal charges, so they believe they were tricked into signing the request for a general discharge. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 29 November 2023, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (AWOL) / Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c (1), / JKD / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 15 April 2020 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: On 7 April 2020, the separation authority approved the conditional waiver of the applicant. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 April 2020 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 October 2018 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / HS Graduate / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25U10, Signal Support Systems Specialist / 7 years, 2 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA / HD (15 January 2013 - 15 October 2018) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWTSM, KDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) A review of the applicant records fails to show their counseling statement, nonjudicial punishment and approved leave form. However, the applicant's leave and earnings statement, covering the period 1-31 January 2020, reflects the applicant was charged leave for 9 days, 28 December 2019 through 5 January 2020. (Note: applicant contends they were on leave 20 December 2019 through 5 January 2020.) (2) A memorandum, Headquarters, 1st Cavalry Division Artillery, subject: Commander Recommendation on Conditional Waiver Request, dated 7 April 2020, the commander recommended approval of the applicant's Conditional Waiver Request and that the applicant received a characterization of service as general, under honorable conditions. The commander states the applicant has been and continues to be non-compliant to any Army values and is a cancer to the unit, eroding good order and discipline in constant subtle ways. Removing the applicant from service immediately is in the best interest of the Army. (3) A memorandum, Headquarters, 1st Cavalry Division subject: Separation under the Provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separation, Paragraph 14-12c, (Commission of Serious Offense) [Applicant], 9 April 2020, the separation authority states – (a) Having carefully considered the separation packet, recommendations by the chain of command and the applicant's conditional waiver regarding separation from the Army prior to the expiration of their current term of service, approved the applicant's conditional wavier voluntarily waiving their separation board. (b) The applicant will be discharged from the United States Army and furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. (c) The applicant has completed the separation history and physical examination on 30 July 2019. (4) A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows in: * item 4a (Grade, Rate or Rank) – Private First Class * item 4b (Pay Grade) – E-3 * item 12c (Net Active Service This Period) – 7 year, 2 months, 15 days * item 12i (Effective Date of Pay Grade) – 10 September 2019 * item 24 (Character of Service) – Under Honorable Conditions (General) * item 25 (Separation Authority) – Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(1) * item 26 (Separation Code) – JKD [Misconduct, AWOL] * item 27 (Reentry Code) – 3 * item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – Misconduct, (AWOL) (5) The Enlisted Record Brief, dated 20 April 2020, reflects the applicant was advanced to the rank of specialist/E-4 on 15 January 2015, and was later reduced to the rank of private first class/E-3 on 10 September 2019. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 10 days (27 December 2019 – 5 January 2020) / NIF 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 from the Armed Forces of the United States) * Montgomery GI Bill Act of 1984 Basic Enrollment, reflecting the applicant's acknowledgment of their eligibility or lack of eligibility for benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill * DD Forms 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document – Armed Forces of the United States) and supporting documents, reflecting the applicant's reenlistment * Honorable Discharge Certificate, reflecting the applicant's honorable service during their initial enlistment * DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), reflecting the applicant's approved award recommendation for an Army Achievement Medal * two Permanent Orders, reflecting the applicant's award of two Army Good Conduct Medals * Case Files for Approved Separation, reflecting the applicant's approved request for a Conditional Waiver and their character of service as general, under honorable conditions * DD Form 214 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), dated 19 December 2016, 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) A Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge is an administrative separation form 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 (Commission of a Service Offense), stated 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. (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 “JKD” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, misconduct (AWOL). 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 Instruction 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 DoD Instruction 1332.28. b. A review of the available evidence provides an administrative irregularity in the proper retention of records, specifically the AMHRR is void of their misconduct that led to their approved separation. The applicant's case file for approve separation contains the separation authority memorandum, directing the separation of the applicant with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service. Due to the lack of evidence, the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the misconduct to be discharged under the provision on Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c (1) are unknown. Notwithstanding the absence of records, the DD Form 214, signed by the applicant, provides the applicant was discharged with a character of service of general (under honorable conditions) for misconduct (AWOL) rather than a discharge under other than honorable conditions, which is normally considered appropriate. They completed 7 year, 2 months, and 22 days of net active service, completing their first full term of service. However, they only completed 1 year, 6 months of their 4-year reenlistment contractual obligation. 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. Neither the applicant nor the AMHRR provide documentation of a PTSD diagnosis prior to the applicant's discharge from the 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 in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder with full remission, and Antisocial Personality traits. Post-service, he is service connected for Major Depressive Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant held in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder with full remission, and Antisocial Personality traits. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that while grief, depression, and desire to have closure are acknowledged, the applicant was fully aware of the decisions he was making knowing right from wrong and possible consequences. Thus, if the applicant was AWOL, versus on leave as asserted, and even in consideration of liberal consideration, there is no mitigation. (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 in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder with full remission, and Antisocial Personality traits did not outweigh the basis of separation. b. Prior Decisions Cited: None c. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends they signed out on leave from 20 December 2019 through 5 January 2020, which led to their misconduct of AWOL. The Board considered this contention, however, the applicant's leave and earnings statement, covering the period 1-31 January 2020, reflects the applicant was charged leave for 9 days, 28 December 2019 through 5 January 2020 which leaves 20-27 December unaccounted for. (2) The applicant contends they believe they were tricked into signing the request for a general discharge to avoid being held past their ETS. The Board considered the totality of the applicant’s record, including the applicant’s BH condition and determined that a discharge upgrade is not warranted based on the seriousness of the applicant’s misconduct. 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(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. e. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board discussed and voted to accept "AWOL" as the basis of separation based on the medical advisor's review of the Applicant's medical records, applicant's personal statement and narrative reason listed on DD 214. 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 in-service mitigating factors and concurred with the conclusion of the medical advising official that the applicant's Major Depressive Disorder did not mitigate the totality of the applicant's misconduct (marijuana use, arrest for rolling through a stop sign and/or unpaid tolls, disrespect toward an NCO, and AWOL). 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 AR20210017426 1