1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 29 September 2021 b. Date Received: 4 October 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, a post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) condition and other mental illnesses were not properly diagnosed or treated while serving in the military. In a telephonic personal appearance hearing conducted on 6 June 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the accepted bases for separation - disturbing the peace, resisting arrest, communicating a threat, extortion, drunk and disorderly, false official statement, conduct non-becoming of an officer - were both proper and equitable. 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: In Lieu of Trial By Court-Martial / AR 600-8-24, Paragraph 3-13 / DFS / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 5 October 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): NIF (2) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Chapter 3, AR 600-8-24, Resignation, In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (5) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 16 September 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 18 March 2010 / NIF b. Age at Appointment / Education: 31 / Bachelor's Degree c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-3 / 90A, Logistics / 16 years, 4 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USMC, 25 August 1997 - 24 August 2001 / HD USMCR, 14 January 2003 - 25 October 2003 / HD RA, 16 November 2006 - 17 March 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, (10 February 2003 - 8 July 2003). Kuwait, (8 October 2012 - 6 October 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-4, AAM-2, USN Achievement Medal, Navy/Marine Combat Action Ribbon, USN Commendation Medal, MUC, USN Unit Commendation, USN/USMC PUC, AGCM, USMC GCM, USMC Reserve Ribbon, NDSM, AFEM, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, AFSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR, AFRM-M-Device, USN Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, Driver and Mechanic Badge-Mechanic g. Performance Ratings: 25 September 2010 - 24 September 2011 / Best Qualified 25 September 2011 - 26 July 2012 / Best Qualified 27 July 2012 - 26 July 2013 / Best Qualified 27 July 2013 - 6 February 2014 / Best Qualified 7 February 2014 - 27 April 2015 / Unsatisfactory 28 April 2015 - 5 October 2015 / Not Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provides a Department of Veterans Affairs Rating Decision, dated 4 May 2021, which reflects the applicant was granted an evaluation of PTSD, major depressive disorder and alcohol use disorder (also claimed as ADHD, sleep disturbances, anxiety, and displacement disorder), which was 70-percent disabling. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, Letter from Social Security Administration, DD Forms 214-4, College Transcripts, Letter from Caregiver Stipend Program, Department of Veterans Affairs, Rating Decision, dated 4 May 2021, Letter from VA, dated 15 March 2016, Certification of Investigation, Medical Records-500-plus pages 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant provides college transcripts. 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 600-8-24, Officer Transfers and Discharges, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers. Chapter 3, paragraph 3-13, outlines the rules for processing requests for resignation for the good of the service in lieu of trial by general court-martial. An officer separated under this paragraph normally receives characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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 Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant contends a PTSD condition and other mental illnesses were not properly diagnosed or treated while serving in the military. The applicant provides a VA Rating Decision, dated 4 May 2021, which reflects the applicant was granted an evaluation of PTSD, major depressive disorder and alcohol use disorder (also claimed as ADHD, sleep disturbances, anxiety, and displacement disorder), which was 70-percent disabling. 9. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): N/A b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): Applicant and character witness provided oral argument and statements in support of the contentions provided in written submissions and in support of previously submitted documentary evidence. c. Counsel / Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. 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. The applicant held the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses: Acute Stress Reaction, ADHD, Adjustment Disorder, Depression, Major Depressive Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Alcohol Use Disorder, combat-related PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant held in-service diagnoses of Acute Stress Reaction, ADHD, Adjustment Disorder, Depression, Major Depressive Disorder, PTSD, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal considerations and determined that the none of the applicant's conditions - Acute Stress Reaction, ADHD, Adjustment Disorder, Depression, Major Depressive Disorder, PTSD, or Generalized Anxiety Disorder - are mitigating in this case. The applicant's intentional acts, specifically laid-out by the applicant's testimony, recollecting in detail the events and justifications surrounding the decisions that were made, are not mitigated by the applicant's diagnoses in respect to the accepted basis for separation - disturbing the peace, resisting arrest, communicating a threat, extortion, drunk and disorderly, false official statement, conduct non-becoming of an officer. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant contend a PTSD condition and other mental illnesses were not properly diagnosed or treated while serving in the military. The ADRB is not bound by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decisions. There is no law or regulation which requires that an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the Board determination that there was a condition or experience that existed during the applicant's time in service. The Board must also articulate the nexus between that condition or experience and the basis for separation. Then, the Board must determine that the condition or experience outweighed the basis for separation. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former service member is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the ARBA when determining a member's discharge characterization. In this case, the Board determined that the intentional and in-depth detail the applicant provided surrounding the decisions leading to the accepted basis for separation, none of the applicant's BH conditions excused or mitigated disturbing the peace, resisting arrest, communicating a threat, extortion, drunk and disorderly, false official statement, conduct non-becoming of an officer. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. 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 not to change the applicant's characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant's Acute Stress Reaction, ADHD, Adjustment Disorder, Depression, Major Depressive Disorder, PTSD, or Generalized Anxiety Disorder did not excuse or mitigate the accepted bases for separation - disturbing the peace, resisting arrest, communicating a threat, extortion, drunk and disorderly, false official statement, conduct non-becoming of an officer. 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. 11. 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 AR20220000426 1