1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 22 February 2016 b. Date Received: 2 March 2016 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he became ill while on leave and missed his return flight to his duty station; his platoon sergeant was aware of the situation and the first sergeant was not; when he returned he received an Article 15. His discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated medical incident for which he should have been given a medical discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant did not have mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. A limited review through the JLV (Joint Legacy Viewer) of the applicant's Veterans Affairs records notes 26 problems (eight VA-entered) including PTSD, major depressive disorder recurrent moderate, ulcerative colitis/abdominal pain, plantar fasciitis, low back pain, tobacco user and others. The Veteran's Affairs has service-connected the applicant at 70 percent overall. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 June 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (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: 5 December 2012 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 31 October 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; being absent without leave from (18 July 2012 until 16 August 2012); and he wrongfully assaulted Ms. A.B., by grabbing her nose. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 6 November 2012, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 7 November 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 June 2011 / 3 years, 23 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 years / HS Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 1 years, 2 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: A Military police Report, dated 27 February 2012, shows that the applicant was the subject of an investigation for spouse abuse, simple assault, consummated by battery, wrongfully damaging of private property, and detention cell activation and deactivation, on post. A negative counseling statement, dated 8 March 2012, for being recommended for UCMJ action. FG Article 15, dated 8 May 2012, for unlawfully grabbing Ms. A.B. (27 February 2012); reduction to PV2 / E-2, forfeiture of $835 pay for two months (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days and an oral reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 29 days, 18 July 2012 to 16 August 2012; mode of return unknown; and civilian confinement for 70 days, 17 August 2012 to 26 October 2012. Total lost time 99 days. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 20 August 2012, revealed that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood. From a Behavioral Health evaluation standpoint, he was recommended for treatment to address present concerns/issues and to enhance his coping skills to deal with everyday Army/life stressors. He is at great risk for safety concerns if he continues to respond poorly to routine life and work stressors and does not receive treatment. He was advised to receive treatment through the Department of Behavioral Health and through the Veteran Affairs Department once he transitions out of the Army. Further, separation from the Army was in the best interest of both the applicant and the Army. He was not deployed, he was assessed for PTSD and TBI and both screens were negative. These conditions have not caused behaviors precipitating this chapter separation. Applicant is currently responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative or judicial proceedings. He denied history of and current suicidal or homicidal ideation, as well as denied any other psychiatric conditions. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages). 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 14-12c 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." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents 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 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, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, he became ill while on leave and missed his return flight to his duty station; his platoon sergeant was aware of the situation and the first sergeant was not; when he returned he received an Article 15. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant further contends, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated medical incident for which he should have been given a medical discharge. The service record indicates the applicant committed several discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 21 June 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change f. 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 AR20160005425 3