1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 6 July 2015 b. Date Received: 9 July 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general, under honorable conditions. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge should be changed based on his honorable service. He went AWOL to prevent a former Soldier from committing suicide and killing others in the process, which was his initial intent. Once he returned, he was repeatedly lied to about his pay status and was forced to leave again to ensure his family was cared for financially. The applicant states that the reduction in rank was ample punishment for the crime committed. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicants behavioral health condition of PTSD was mitigating for the misconduct of going AWOL but not for other offenses to include 3 DUIs, weapons charge, simple assault and possessing Paraphernalia. PTSD has been found to impact decision making and is associated with risky and impulsivity behaviors. The applicant was seen by behavioral health upon returning home from first deployment and diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety (sleep problems, irritability, and anger concerns). Returned early from second deployment and placed in Warrior Transition Unit (WTU) due to kidney problems. Consistent behavioral health treatment from 2010-2013. Diagnosed with Anxiety (September 2010), Alcohol Problem (November 2010), and PTSD (September 2012). Mental Status Exam from September 2014 indicated Chronic PTSD (secondary to combat deployment); however, he had a negative score (42) on the screener. He did screen positive for TBI, but met medical retention standards and was psychiatrically cleared. He entered the IDES/MEB system in October 2012, but did not complete due to AWOL status. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 September 2016, and by a 5-0 vote the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service, circumstances surrounding the AWOL, and his in-service PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 17 October 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 15 September 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was AWOL (29 March 2013 – 21 August 2014). (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 September 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: Unconditionally waived, 28 September 2014. (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 2 October 2014 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 20 October 2008 / 4 years / 8 months extension (14 December 2010) b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-5 / 11B1O, Infantryman / 6 years, 10 months, and 27 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA, 29 June 2006 - 19 October 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (27 September 2007 - 21 October 2008) and Afghanistan (4 May 2010 - 10 August 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM-2, NDSM, ICM-CS, ACM-CS, GWTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO Medal, CIB, MUC g. Performance Ratings: 1 October 2010 – 31 May 2012, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 8 March 2013, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 13 February 2013 and 19 February 2013) and disobeying a lawful order issued by Captain A.N. (13 February 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $1,201.00 pay for two months, $600.50 for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. DA Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 24 April 2013, reflects the applicant was charged with violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, AWOL. Military Police Report, dated 1 May 2013, reflects the applicant was the subject on an investigation for departing from place of duty (AWOL) (on post). Five DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated between 2 April 2013 and 21 August 2014, reflect the applicant’s duty status changed as follows: From “Present for Duty (PDY)” to “Absent Without Leave (AWOL),” effective 12 February 2013 From “AWOL” to “PDY,” effective 19 February 2013 From “PDY” to “AWOL,” effective 29 March 2013 From “AWOL” to “Dropped From Rolls (DFR),” effective 30 March 2013 From “DFR” to “PDY,” effective 21 August 2014 The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and to start the IDES/MEB process. i. Lost Time: 508 days (AWOL, 29 March 2013 – 21 August 2014) j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 5 September 2014, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) Chronic PTSD secondary to combat deployment. His screen for mTBI was positive. He met medical retention per AR 40-501 and was psychiatrically cleared for administrative separation in accordance with Chapter 14-12c. DD Form 2697 (Report of Medical Assessment), dated 26 August 2014, relates that his healthcare provider indicated the applicant had multiple visits for PTSD with behavioral health. DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 26 August 2014, reflects the applicant reported as being diagnosed with PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 6 July 2015, and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 allows for separation for misconduct with paragraph 14-1 allowing for separating personnel because of minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, or absence without leave. Paragraph 14-2 states action will be taken to separate a Soldier for misconduct when it is clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him/her as a Soldier further effort is not likely to succeed; rehabilitation is impracticable or the Soldier is not amenable to rehabilitation. 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. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members’ discharges. “Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre-existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service.” “Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct.” 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The applicant’s record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By the misconduct (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge at the time of separation. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. The applicant contends that his discharge should be changed because his service to his nation was honorable. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant further contends, he went AWOL to prevent a former Soldier from committing suicide and killing others in the process, which was his initial intent; and he was repeatedly lied to about his pay status and was forced to leave again to ensure his family was cared for financially. He 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 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. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 September 2016, and by a 5-0 vote the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service, circumstances surrounding the AWOL, and his in-service PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General (Under Honorable Conditions) c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: 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 BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 VA - Veterans Affair ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150011782 5