IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 June 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140010218 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service and his diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. It is concluded that the PTSD condition may have been a causative factor in the misconduct that led to the discharge. After carefully weighing that fact against the severity of the applicant’s misconduct, there is sufficient mitigating evidence to warrant upgrading the characterization of the applicant’s service to general, under honorable conditions. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. However, the Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Presiding Officer I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case. THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general, under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was supposed to be discharged under the provisions of Chapter 9 with an honorable characterization of service. He contends, upon his return from Freedom Care, Cedar Hills Hospital, he should have been discharged immediately and was counseled on that fact. However, he states, he had his driving privileges revoked, ordered to turn in the keys to his vehicle and apartment, and restricted to post. He states, if he would have been immediately discharged upon his return to the unit the events that transpired would have never occurred. He contends, he developed a dependency on alcohol, suffered from anxiety and depression and had thoughts of suicide many times. He states, since his discharge he does not drink anymore, but still suffers from PTSD, insomnia, anxiety, and panic attacks. He enrolled himself into a local college and seeks to use the benefits he has earned for further treatment and counseling through the Department of Veterans Affairs. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 9 June 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 8 January 2014 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, AR 635-200, Chapter 10, KFS, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: 4th Squadron, 6th US Cavalry (Rear) (Provisional), Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 7 December 2007/Indefinite g. Current Enlistment Service: 6 years, 1 month, 2 days h. Total Service: 17 years, 4 months, 16 days i. Time Lost: 41 days j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 960823-961105, NA RA, 961106-000207, HD RA, 000208-010315, HD RA, 010316-040823, HD RA, 040824-071206, HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-7 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 42A14 Human Resources Specialist m. GT Score: 128 n. Education: Associates Degree o. Overseas Service: Germany, SWA, Yugoslavia, Kosovo p. Combat Service: Iraq (040209-050223) Kosovo (021022-030718) q. Decorations/Awards: ICM-2CS, MSM, ARCOM-3, AAM-3, JMUA, MUC, VUA, USUA, AGCM-5, NDSM, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, NOPDR-3, ASR, OSR-5, KCM-BSS, NATO MDL, CAB r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 November 1996, for a period of 4 years. He was 24 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He reenlisted in the Army several times, and on 7 December 2007, he reenlisted for an indefinite period of time. He served in Germany, Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Kosovo. He earned an MSM, three ARCOMs, three AAMs, and a CAB. The applicant completed 17 years, 4 months, and 16 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving in Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) which indicates that on 26 November 2013, the applicant was charged with the following offenses: a. failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: physical training formation (130918-131119), b. disobeying a lawful order and disrespecting an NCO (131119), c. disobeying a lawful order from a commissioned officer (130918, 131022, 131119), d. assaulting an NCO x 2 (131119) and, e. overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or drugs, incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties, being prejudicial to the good order and discipline, and bring discredit upon the armed forces (130918). 2. The applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, included the offense of failing to report and resisting apprehension (131119). 3. On 12 December 2013, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense. The applicant indicated he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant elected to submit a statement on his own behalf (NIF). The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 27 December 2013, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. On 30 December 2013, the applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 8 January 2014, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 6. The applicant’s record of service indicates 41 days of time lost for being confined from 19 November 2013 until his release on 29 December 2013. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Permanent Orders Number 361-001, dated 30 December 2013, reduced the applicant from the grade of E-5 to E-1, effective 27 December 2013. 2. DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 30 December 2013, reflects the applicant’s duty status change. 3. Charge Sheet, dated 26 November 2013, reflects the applicant was charged with the offenses listed in paragraph one, separate facts and circumstances. 4. Article 15, dated 8 October 2013, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or drugs, incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties on 18 September 2013. The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-5 (suspended) and forfeiture of $500 pay (FG). 5. Command Directed BAC Test memorandum, dated 19 November 2013, reflects the applicant was directed to take a blood alcohol content (BAC) test based on probable cause that he was under the influence of alcohol. 6. A MP Report, dated 19 November 2013, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for resisting arrest, assault, drunk and disorderly conduct, and DNA kit. 7. DA Form 2627-2 (Record of Supplementary Action under Article 15, UCMJ), dated 20 November 2013, reflects the suspended punishment imposed on 8 October 2013, was vacated because on 19 November 2013, the applicant failed to report on two occasions, drank alcohol in violation of a direct order, refused orders of higher NCOs, assaulted his platoon sergeant with a closed fist which caused him to bleed, and actively resisted apprehension. 8. Addendum to DA Form 8003, dated 6 June 2013, reflects the applicant was enrolled in a long-term program (LTP). 9. A MP Blotter Report, dated 19 September 2013, reflects the applicant was command-directed to take a BAC test. The applicant was administered the test with results of .230/.222. 10. A memorandum, dated 18 September 2013, reflects the unit commander’s request for the applicant to take a BAC test. 11. DA Form 2329 (Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial), dated 6 September 2013, reflects the applicant was found guilty of failing to obey an order and disrespecting a commissioned officer (130616), overindulging in intoxicating liquor or drugs that incapacitated him from properly performing his duties (130429), and failing to go to his appointed place of duty x7, (130318, 130319, 130320, 130408, 130430, 130615, and 130616). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-6 and forfeiture of $2,399 pay for one month. 12. Memorandum, dated 16 June 2013, reflects a request for a BAC test due to suspicion that the applicant was drunk while enrolled in ASAP and to determine his fitness for duty. The test results reflected a BAC of .158 and .161. 13. Memorandum, dated 29 April 2013, reflects a request for a BAC test due to suspicion that the applicant was drunk on duty and to determine his fitness for duty. The test results reflected a BAC of .190 and .189. 14. DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 30 October 2013, reflects the applicant had no obvious impairments, could appreciate the difference between right and wrong, and had a positive screening for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The report reflects the applicant had a history of treatment with ASAP for alcohol dependence. 15. Numerous counseling statements, dated between 20 March 2013 and 18 September 2013, for failing to report, failing to follow the instructions of the flight surgeon, recommendation for Article 15, failing to be at his appointed place of duty, failing to obey a lawful order, being drunk on duty, being an ASAP failure, revocation of his off-post pass privileges, notification of his reporting requirements to 4-6 ARS, and having a 24-hour escort. 16. Six NCOERs covering the period of 1 April 2007 through 30 November 2012. The applicant was rated as “Among the Best” on four reports and as “Fully Capable” and “Marginal” on the remaining two reports by his raters. He received four “1/1” ratings, a “2/2” rating and a “4/4” rating from his senior raters. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 9 June 2014; a DD Form 214; a DA Form 3822, dated 7 May 2013, reflecting a diagnosis of alcohol dependence and anxiety (adjustment disorder vs anxiety disorder NOS); Cedar Hills Hospital Continuing Discharge Plan, dated 7 May 2013; three counseling statements, dated 30 April 2013, 4 June 2013, and 2 August 2013; a memorandum, dated 13 June 2013, reflecting his failure to complete ASAP; a summary court-martial defense motion for appropriate relief, dated 5 September 2013; a clemency request, dated 13 September 2013; four DA Forms 3349 (Physical Profile), dated 4 November 2011, 29 August 2012, 21 March 2013, and 6 June 2013; a self-authored statement, dated 12 February 2015; Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Corrections of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming PTSD, dated 3 September 2014; a letter from Mr. G, MFT, Carson Tahoe Regional Healthcare, dated 11 February 2015; treatment notes from Carson Tahoe Behavioral Health Services; Enlisted Record Brief, dated 24 September 2013; nine NCOERs; four DA Forms 1059; a Distinguished Honor Graduate certificate; a Commandant’s List certificate; a certificate of graduation; two certificates of training; a MSM certificate; two ARCOM certificates; three AAM certificates; Permanent Orders 183-01; Orders Number 73-1615; Permanent Orders 271-23; Permanent Orders 318-01; Permanent Orders 39-01; Permanent Orders 323-01; a Good Conduct Medal certificate; Permanent Orders 103-1; DA Form 4187, dated 20 January 2003; an award of foreign badge with certificates, dated 16 October 2003 and 5 June 2003; NATO Medal certificate; six certificates of achievement; a certificate of recognition; and four enlistment contracts and allied documents. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant states, since his discharge, he does not drink anymore but still suffer from insomnia, anxiety, and panic attacks; as well as, has symptoms of PTSD. He is enrolled in the local college. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. 2. Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to general, under honorable conditions for the following reasons: a. Length and quality of service: The applicant served a total of 17 years, 4 months, 16 days of a active duty service. He served 6 years, 1 month, and 2 days from his last reenlistment, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable. b. The record confirms the applicant received several awards, specifically a MSM, three ARCOMs, three AAMs, and a CAB, which was for a tour in combat. c. The applicant’s in-service diagnosis and continued post-service treatment of PTSD may have been a mitigating factor which contributed to his declined duty performance and conduct. 3. This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 4. The applicant’s service record contains several memorandums that reflect the unit commander requested the applicant receive command directed BAC tests. However, there is no evidence that this was a violation of the limited use policy because it appears the tests were requested and conducted based on probable cause that the applicant was drunk on duty, drunk while enrolled in ASAP, and to determine his fitness for duty based on his conduct and performance. 5. In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 26 June 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 4 No Change: 1 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: Yes Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: NA Change RE Code to: NA Grade Restoration to: SSG/E-6 Other: NA Legend: AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record FG - Field Grade IADT – Initial Active Duty Training RE - Reentry AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable SCM- Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial CG - Company Grade Article 15 HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge CID - Criminal investigation Department MP – Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont) AR20140010218 Page 2 of 8 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1