1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 29 June 2015 b. Date Received: 17 July 2015 c. Counsel: [Redacted] 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he discharge should be upgraded because he was discharged due to alcohol use following a combat deployment to Afghanistan. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant likely had a mitigating behavioral health condition for some, but not all of the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. Review of the Active Duty electronic medical records found evidence of PTSD symptoms. A note from the Psychology Clinic at Landstuhl RMC dated 20 June 2011 stated that the applicant was a poor candidate for cognitive testing due to confounds of depressed mood, PTSD, and ongoing treatment for alcohol abuse/dependence. It was recommended that the applicant undergo neuropsychological testing after stabilization of those conditions through the VA. The applicant received a diagnosis and disability rating for PTSD from the VA. Because PTSD can be associated with alcohol abuse and/or dependence, defiance or disobedience of authority figures, and avoidance behaviors, the actions of disobeying orders (some orders were not to consume alcohol) and failure to be at prescribed place of duty were likely mitigated in this case. However, intentional deception by wrongful use of another Soldier's ID card is not characteristic of PTSD. Review of the file and medical records did not reveal an association between the applicant's history of TBI and the misconduct. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 August 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, and circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. VA diagnosed PTSD related to combat / OBH). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 17 August 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 31 May 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: wrongfully used, with intent to deceive, another’s military identification card (23 January 2011); disobeyed a lawful order issued by a commissioned officer on divers occasions (13 February 2011, 5 March 2011 and 29 - 30 April 2011); and, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (2 March 2011). (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 June 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 3 August 2011 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 7 April 2009 / 3 years and 17 weeks b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-3 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 2 years, 4 months, and 11 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Italy, SWA / Afghanistan (15 December 2009 – 15 January 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: PH, AAM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO Medal, CIB g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 28 February 2011, for wrongfully use with intent to deceive another’s military identification card (23 January 2011). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of 383.00 pay, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. CG Article 15, dated 1 April 2011, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and for disobeying a lawful order by a commissioned officer (5 March 2011). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $342.00 pay, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: Landstuhl Regional Medical Center Health Record, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 7 March 2011, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) Alcohol Abuse and Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety DA Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 8 March 2011, reflects the applicant reported being treated for anxiety. MEDCOM Form 4038 (Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation), dated 16 March 2011, reflects the applicant had a clear and normal thought process and was mentally responsible. The applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) Alcohol dependence in remission. Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) Compensation and Pension Exam Report, printed 23 March 2012, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) PTSD and Alcohol Dependency in sustained remission. VA Rating Decision Letter, dated 29 March 2012, reflects the applicant was assigned a 30 percent evaluation for service connected PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 29 June 2015; DD Form 214; and the following: Four cover letters from Mr. Sean Kendall, Attorney at Law, dated between 29 January 2016 and 3 June 2016; VAMC Compensation and Pension Exam Report, printed 23 March 2012 (13 pages); Rating Decision Letter, dated 29 March 2012 (14 pages); Four letters of recommendation; and, U.S Army Human Resources Command letter, dated 17 September 2014 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 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. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12a addresses minor disciplinary infractions, defined as a pattern of misconduct, consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. Paragraph 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that 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. 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, such that he should have been retained. The applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because it was due to alcohol use following a combat deployment to Afghanistan. However, the issue the applicant submitted is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. 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 31 August 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, and circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. VA diagnosed PTSD related to combat / OBH). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. 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: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change 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 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150012171 1