1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 October 2016 b. Date Received: 13 December 2016 c. Counsel: None 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, the discharge he received was unjustified because there was not a reason that rehabilitation was no longer feasible. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has AHLTA diagnoses of Alcoholism, Anxiety, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Bereavement without Complications, Conduct Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions, Depression with Anxiety, Feared Medical Condition Not Demonstrated, Homicidal Ideation, Insomnia, Obesity. He has a VA SC disability rating of 10% in the JLV. He had no psychiatric diagnoses from the VA in the JLV. In January 2013, it was determined he was not compliant with ASAP treatment. He also had FAP contacts in 2014 to 2015, with a FAP note of 31 March 2015 noting that an accusation of maltreatment of a child was sustained on 23 September 2014 by the CRB, but also closed case as unresolved when patient and wife returned to Connecticut. He had a Separation Medical Exam on 28 January 2013, and the doctor confirmed a S1 profile. In his health history questionnaire, he complained of insomnia and memory problems. He believed his memory problems might have been linked to "staples in the back of my head." He also claimed to have had a suicide attempt. The examining physician noted these before giving the S1 profile. A record from Providence Behavioral Health included a diagnosis of diagnosis of PTSD, but with scant explanation of rationale. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 December 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. severe family matters and in-service diagnosis of PTSD and OBH), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200 / Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 20 April 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 6 February 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He failed to make satisfactory progress while enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 11 February 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 February 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 June 2011 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 12K10, Plumber / 2 years, 3 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Statement of Progress, dated 8 January 2013, reflects the applicant's rehabilitation team met on 8 January 2013, and, determined the applicant had not used the treatment tools made available to him, and his prognosis for successful completion was poor. His demonstrated lack of motivation and his failure to be compliant with all ASAP requirements were contributing factors in declaring the applicant a rehabilitation failure. FG Article 15, dated 31 January 2013, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (3 and 14 January 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended); forfeiture of $393 pay; and, extra duty for 14 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided copies of his treatment records from Providence Behavioral Health, which reflects he was admitted on 6 November 2012 and was diagnosed with Alcohol dependence; Nicotine Dependence; Opioid abuse RO; and, PTSD (Axis I). The applicant also had a history of suicidal thoughts. The applicant provided a copy of his post-service medical records, which reflect he was diagnosed with Anxiety Disorder NOS (Axis I). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application; and, copies of his medical and behavioral health treatment records. 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 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for alcohol or drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. Army policy states that an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge is authorized depending on the applicant's overall record of service. However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process. 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 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 evidence of record indicates that on 8 January 2013, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), determined the applicant had not used the treatment tools made available to him, and his prognosis for successful completion was poor. His demonstrated lack of motivation and his failure to be compliant with all ASAP requirements were contributing factors in declaring the applicant a rehabilitation failure. The applicant contends he was not given a reason why he could not continue rehabilitation. However, 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. Further, AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier. 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents. b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): Change the narrative reason for separation. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None. 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 December 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. severe family matters and in-service diagnosis of PTSD and OBH), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 AR20170004518 1