1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 May 2015 b. Date Received: 7 November 2016 b. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he was denied VA benefits due to his discharge. His discharge was unjust because it was caused by PTSD and other facts which rendered the applicant disabled. He had a clean record of mental health when he entered and wartime caused PTSD and ultimately his discharge. He was a satisfactory Soldier overall. He has PTSD from the deployment to Iraq that exacerbated his mental and physical exhaustion. His misconduct was caused by the failure of his commanding officers to help him stay healthy and function as a Soldier. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had no mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 10 July 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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 30 October 2008 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 20 August 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he assaulted a Soldier with an M16A2 rifle; he communicated a threat to a Soldier that he would shoot him; he damaged military property by stabbing his CHU wall with a knife during an argument; and on several occasions failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 23 August 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant voluntarily and unconditionally waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation Board (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 September 2008 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 March 2006 / 4 years, 24 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / GED Certificate / 120 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 63B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic / 2 years, 7 months, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 8 November 2007 to 1 August 2008 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summary Court-Martial, dated 23 August 2008, the applicant was found guilty of failing to go to his appointed place of duty x4 (2 January 2008, 27 June 2008, 18 July 2008 and 21 July 2008); damage to military property of a sum less than $500; assault PV2 S., by aiming his firearm at him; and wrongfully communicated a threat to PV2 S., by saying "I'll shoot you" or words to that effect. He was sentenced to a reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $1,006 pay and hard labor without confinement for 45 days. He received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 23 August 2008, revealed that the applicant had Axis I, diagnosis of (V) occupational problem, attention deficit disorder and Axis II, paranoid personality traits. He responded to treatment for attention deficit disorder; his depression is related to occupational / legal stress and would likely resolve after discharge from the Army. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (two pages); self-authored statement; hand written support statement and a 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 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." "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 did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. 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 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, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, he was denied VA benefits due to his discharge. 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 applicant further contends, his discharge was unjust because it was caused by PTSD and other facts which rendered the applicant disabled; he had a clean record of mental health when he entered and wartime caused PTSD and ultimately his discharge; and he has PTSD from the deployment to Iraq that exacerbated his mental and physical exhaustion. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. The service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant also contends, he was a satisfactory Soldier overall. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant additionally contends, his misconduct was caused by the failure of his commanding officers to help him stay healthy and function as a Soldier. Before initiating discharge proceedings, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about his deficiencies which could lead to separation. The command made an assessment of the applicant's potential for becoming a fully satisfactory Soldier. The evidence contained in the service record establishes the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome noted deficiencies. As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service. 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. However, the person providing the character reference statement was not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, this statement did not provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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): 11 pages of medical documents b. The applicant presented no additional contentions. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None. 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 10 July 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 new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160018009 6