1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 1 September 2015 b. Date Received: 9 November 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, according to his submitted evidence, a psychiatrist letter, dated 17 September 2015, the applicant saw on 24 June 2015, was given the diagnoses of PTSD related to combat and depression. The psychiatrist indicated the applicant’s medical conditions may have contributed to his discharge from the military. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 July 2016, 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 combat, and circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. VA diagnosed PTSD and TBI related to combat, assigned 70 percent disability). 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 28 June 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 June 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: violating a lawful general regulation on 1 November 2010, by wrongfully possessing military ammunition; being cited for an impaired driving with a blood alcohol content of .14 percent on 1 November 2010; and failing to report to formations on 15 March 2011 and 26 April 2011. (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 June 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 7 June 2011 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 9 November 2006 / 5 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 92A1P, Automatic Logistical Specialist / 4 years, 7 months, 20 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (5 December 2008 – 8 November 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AAM; AGCM; NDSM; ICM-CS; GWTSM; ASR; OSR; CAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 1 November 2010, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for failure to decrease the speed needed to avoid collision, traffic accident with damage to government/private property, failure to sign registration card, impaired driving, failure to produce name and address, resisting officers, failure to obey a lawful order, disrespect to an NCO, and wrongful appropriation of government property. Negative counseling statements for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the pre scribe time; having unauthorized ammunition; destruction of government property; CG Article 15, dated 1 February 2011, for violating a lawful general regulation on 1 November 2011. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 (suspended), forfeiture of $455 (suspended), and 14 days of extra duty. FG Article 15, dated 2 May 2011, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed times on 15 March 2011 and 26 April 2011. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $733 pay per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty. Record of Supplementary Action under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 17 March 2011, indicates the suspended punishment of a reduction to E-3 and forfeiture of $455, imposed on 1 February 2011, was vacated due to failing to be at his appointed place of duty on 15 March 2011. Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 26 April 2011, the applicant was cleared from a mental health standpoint for any administrative action. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 20 April 2011, indicates the applicant noted behavioral health issues The applicant’s submitted evidence, a psychiatrist letter and VA decision listing indicate the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; psychiatrist letter, dated 17 September 2015; VA rating decision listing (pages 3 and 5); FG Article 15, dated 2 May 2011, DA Form 1059, dated 6 May 2010; and two character reference letters, dated 22 and 24 September 2013. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant’s submitted evidence that indicates he was employed with the MGM Grand Company. 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 14-12c 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. 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 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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, by implication provided the same guidance to the Service Discharge Review Boards whose decisions are reviewable by the Service Correction Boards. That memorandum provided PTSD or PTSD-related conditions "will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service." However, the memorandum also states, "Corrections Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service of under 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 the 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, and 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 on active duty. The applicant’s contentions regarding his behavioral health issues involving PTSD were carefully considered. A careful review of the applicant’s evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health disorder symptoms existed and a diagnosis of PTSD, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. The third-party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant’s character and performance. They recognize his good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant’s chain of command. As such, the statements do not provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to toward granting a relief for an upgrade. The applicant’s third-party statements referred to the applicant’s desire to attend a university, perhaps an indication that an upgrade would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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. DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): 1. College transcript – 1 page 2. Military Awards – 4 pages 3. College Course Curriculum – 1 page 4. PT Score and Weapons card – 2 pages b. The applicant presented the no additional contentions. c. Witness(es)/Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 July 2016, 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 combat, and circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. VA diagnosed PTSD and TBI related to combat, assigned 70 percent disability). 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. 11. 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: 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 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150018922 1