1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 22 August 2022 b. Date Received: 14 October 2022 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant's Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge the Army Discharge Review Board will consider the applicant for a possible upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that applicant was sexually assault by another service member while in the process of being separated. It was never report until 2020 when the applicant admitted to the local VA Psychiatric Ward for having thoughts and plans to commit suicide. The applicant also contends there is also a pay discrepancy pertaining to the dates that applicant returned to the unit. Speaking with DFAS, the applicant was told that they had a debt from the dates of 12 October 2010 to 3 September 2011, as being absent without leave which is not possible because applicant processed back into applicant's unit on 9 March 2011. The applicant contends the MST was never reported mainly because applicant felt they couldn't trust anybody in the unit or chain of command due to the stigma the applicant had gotten because of missing movement. The applicant tried to save their marriage and the unit did nothing to assist applicant except for cutting orders to Korea. The applicant admits to having missed movement "yes", but NEVER wanted to be chaptered out of the Army. During the time the applicant was back in the Unit it was all Rear D type area beautification duties along with CQ & Staff Duty; never once did applicant get in trouble before or after applicant's lost time and applicant's ERB/DD Form 214 reflects that. All anyone knew about the applicant was they went AWOL, and was a "shit bag". So of course, after the Sexual Assault happened, applicant wasn't confident that anything would get done seeing as applicant was somewhat close to the Chapter/ETS date. All the NCOs were busy with the repeat offenders going AWOL, back to get a check then go AWOL again. Or the people who pop hot on a UA. The applicant wasn't about to let anyone know about what happened because it would've spread like cancer through the unit further putting applicant in a category of "making it up to stay in longer" which applicant heard a lot from the SNCOIC & NCO's when they blasted Soldiers business in the orderly room or their platoon office. The applicant contends to have been undergoing MST/PSTD therapy at the VA along with medications applicant takes to help violent mood swings, nightmares, stress induced migraines etc. It has gotten to the point where applicant tried to end their life in 2020 & 2022. So that is applicant's explanation and reason why the Board should consider this application. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 15 May 2023, and by a 5- 0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD due to MST outweighed the applicant's AWOL basis of separation Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 15, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and though the applicant's misconduct is mitigated, the BH conditions are service limiting and thus, the reentry eligibility (RE) code will remain RE-3. 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 August 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 1 August 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: for being absent without leave between on or about 12 October 2010 and about 10 March 2011. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 August 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: None (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 August 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 February 2009 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / HS Graduate / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 14H10, Air Defense Enhanced / 4 years, 7 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 11 August 2006 to 26 February 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, KDSR, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Several DA Form's 4187 (Personnel Action) changing the applicant's duty status as following: Present for Duty (PDY) to Absent Without Leave (AWOL), effective 12 October 2010; and AWOL to PDY, effective 10 March 2011 i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Absent Without Leave for a period of 129 days (12 October 2010 to 9 March 2011) /mode of return unknown j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): See below (1) Applicant provided: Health Summary documents from the Department of Veterans Affairs, indicate the applicant refers to having been Sexually Assaulted while serving in the military. The applicant goes into detail on pages 34 thru 40 about how the event has affected applicant over the years. (2) AMHRR Listed: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 9 May 2011, indicates the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and understand the difference between right and wrong. The applicant was cleared for administrative proceedings. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 in lieu of DD Form 293; online application; certificate's from ECPI University in Culinary Arts and Food Service Management; enlisted record brief (ERB); enlistment documents; Department of Veterans Affairs, health summary; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has received an Associated of Applied Science Degree in Culinary Arts and a Bachelor of Science in Food Service Management since being discharged from the military. 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 14-12c, 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) Chapter 15 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, misconduct (serious offense). 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 DODI 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 waivable and nonwaivable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. 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 requests an upgrade of the character of service. The applicant's available Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. Evidence in the AMHRR indicates separation action was initiated against the applicant for being absent without leave between on or about 12 October 2010 and about 10 March 2011. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs the preparation of the DD Form 214, and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that applicant was sexually assault by another service member while in the process of being separated. It was never report until 2020 when the applicant admitted to the local VA Psychiatric Ward for having thoughts and plans to commit suicide. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, as noted by the applicant in the application: the claims of the MST was never reported plainly for applicant felt they couldn't trust anybody in the unit or chain of command due to the stigma the applicant had gotten because of missing movement. It should also be noted: the Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 9 May 2011, indicates the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and understand the difference between right and wrong. The applicant was cleared for administrative proceedings. The applicant contends, in effect, tried to save applicant's marriage and the unit did nothing to assist the applicant except for cutting orders to Korea. The applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, and there is no evidence in the record that the applicant ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant also contends, in effect, there is also a pay discrepancy pertaining to the dates that applicant returned to the unit. Speaking with DFAS, the applicant was told that applicant had a debt from the dates of 12 October 2010 to 3 September 2011, as being absent without leave which is not possible because applicant processed back into the unit on 9 March 2011. The applicant's requested issue does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from 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, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses/experiences: PTSD due to MST and Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant experienced a MST during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that while the post-AWOL MST does not excuse the misconduct, it is mitigating as it is this advisor's opinion the MST outweighs the misconduct. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the applicant's PTSD due to MST outweighed the AWOL basis for separation for the aforementioned reason(s). b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant seeks relief contending that being sexually assault by another service member while in the process of being separated. It was never report until 2020 when the applicant admitted to the local VA Psychiatric Ward for having thoughts and plans to commit suicide. The Board considered this contention and voted to upgrade the applicant's discharge due to the applicant's PTSD due to MST outweighing the AWOL basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends there is a pay discrepancy pertaining to the dates that applicant returned to their unit. Speaking with DFAS, the applicant was told that applicant had a debt from the dates of 12 October 2010 to 3 September 2011, as being absent without leave which is not possible because applicant processed back into their unit on 9 March 2011. The Board determined that the applicant's requested change to the DD Form 214 does not fall within the purview of the ADRB. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using a DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD due to MST outweighed the applicant's AWOL basis of separation Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 15, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and though the applicant's misconduct is mitigated, the BH conditions are service limiting and thus, the reentry eligibility (RE) code will remain RE-3. 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. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD due to MST mitigated the applicant's misconduct of AWOL. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority under the same pretexts, thus the reason for discharge is no longer appropriate. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JFF. (3) The RE code will not change due to applicant's PTSD due to MST diagnosis, a waiver to reenter military service is necessary. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Secretarial Authority / JFF d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 15 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 AR20220009580 1