1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 October 2015 b. Date Received: 19 October 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 honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he failed to receive the proper counseling or treatment prior to his discharge. He had a breakdown and received no mental help. His career was shortened due to a lack of knowledge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has a Behavioral Health Condition which is mitigating for some but not all of the offenses leading to his discharge from the Army. The applicant has been diagnosed with PTSD related to military service by the VA. As PTSD is associated with avoidant behaviors, there is likely a nexus between his PTSD and the offense of being AWOL. As PTSD is associated with use of illicit drugs to self-medicate symptoms, there is a nexus between his PTSD and the use of marijuana and cocaine. PTSD is not mitigating for the offenses of fleeing apprehension by the police and larceny of private property. Both the military and VA electronic medical records were reviewed. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 February 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. severe, recurrent OBH and VA diagnosed PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade to 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635- 200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 21 September 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 31 August 2005, reflects the applicant was charged with violation of the UCMJ, Articles 86, 95, 112a, and 121. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Charge I: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, AWOL Specification 1: 26 July 2005 to 1 August 2005 Specification 2: 4 August 2005 to 11 August 2005 Charge II: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 95, Fleeing apprehension by military police. Charge III: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a, Wrongful use of controlled substances Specification 1: Wrongfully used marijuana (between 20 June 2005 and 20 July 2005) Specification 2: Wrongfully used cocaine (between 15 July 2005 and 20 July 2005) Charge IV: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 121, Larceny and wrongful appropriation (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 8 September 2005 (5) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 12 September 2005 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 28 June 2002 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 5 years, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 7 July 2000 to 30 May 2001 / NIF IADT, 31 May 2001 to 21 September 2001 / NIF USAR, 22 September 2001 to 27 June 2002 / NIF e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait/Iraq (30 April 2003 to 5 May 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, ICM, ARCOM, GWOTSM, NDSM, ASR, OSR-2 g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet as described in preceding paragraph 3c(2) CG Article 15, dated 2 December 2004, for dereliction of duty (30 September 2004), disobeyed a lawful order (28 September 2004), and failed to report to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed (3 August 2004). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 and forfeiture of $349 pay. Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 28 March 2005, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC (marijuana) and COC (cocaine) during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing conducted on 9 March 2005. State of Tennessee, Case Docket History report, dated 13 April 2005, reflects the applicant was arrested for Assault, Domestic violence. FG Article 15, dated 8 June 2005, for wrongfully using marijuana (between 7 February and 9 March 2005), wrongfully used cocaine (between 1 and 9 March 2005), being AWOL (between 8 and 19 April 2005), and failed to report to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed (28 April and 1 May 2005). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 and extra duty for 45 days. DD Form 2624, dated 20 July 2005, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC (marijuana) and COC (cocaine), during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 20 July 2005. CID Report of Investigation, dated 24 August 2005, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for wrongful possession and use of cocaine and marijuana. Ten Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Confined by Civilian Authority CCA" to "Present for Duty (PDY)," effective 1 April 2005; From "PDY" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 8 April 2005; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 19 April 2005; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 26 July 2005; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 1 August 2005; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 4 August 2005; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 11 August 2005; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 12 August 2005; From "PDY" to "CCA," effective 14 August 2005; and, From "CCA" to "PDY," effective 17 August 2005. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms for failing to obey order or regulation on multiple occasions; failure to report on multiple occasions; positive urinalysis for marijuana and cocaine; violated no contact order; AWOL on multiple occasions; arrested for domestic violence; violation of court order; malingering; recommendation for separation; disrespect toward an NCO; assaulting or disobeying a superior commissioned officer; and, insubordinate conduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 44 days 17 days (AWOL, 14 to 31 March 2005) 10 days (AWOL, 8 to 18 April 2005) 15 days (AWOL, 26 July to 10 August 2005) 2 days (CCA, 14 to 16 August 2005) / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with his application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): 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. 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. 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 honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date. The applicant contends he was suffering from mental problems, which affected his behavior and led to his discharge. However, the service record contains no evidence of a mental condition or diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 February 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. severe, recurrent OBH and VA diagnosed PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade to 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: No Change AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer 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 NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150017427 1