1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 22 April 2015 b. Date Received: 27 April 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he was not given the proper chain of command support he needed to resolve issues he was experiencing during his enlistment. He was ignored, brushed off, or told, "there is nothing wrong with you" when trying to seek proper help. He was denied access to appointments. There were even times when his direct line NCO threatened his life and he felt those reasons were harmful to him and led to his discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, there were no mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses which led to the applicant's separation from the Army. The applicant's Active Duty electronic medical records were reviewed. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 25 July 2016, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length of service and testimony. 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: Pattern Of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 19 May 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 20 January 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; On 13 November 2008, his commander received notice from APG CID that you were the subject of investigation into alleged sexual assault and sodomy on a PVT S.R.W., C Company, 15th OD BN. The applicant informed the First Sergeant, SGT K., and his company commander that he did have sexual relations with PVT W., yet the relations were consensual. The final CID Report received by company commander on 12 January 2009, both he and PVT W. admitted to having a relationship involving sexual contact, but no clear evidence of his most recent contact being coerced. This is in violation of AR 600-20 in which "any relationship between permanent party personnel and initial entry training (IET) trainees not required by the training mission is prohibited. This prohibition applies to permanent party personnel without regard to the installation of assignment of the permanent party member or the trainee". On 1 April 2008, he received a CG Article 15 for insubordinate conduct towards a non-commissioned officer by failing to secure his TA-50, and not completing corrective training for another incident. Included in the Article 15 was a charge of failing to report to PT formation at 0630 on 11 October 2007. His punishment was 14 days extra duty and 14 days restriction with reduction in rank suspended for 180 days. On 20 May, he was again insubordinate to a non-commissioned officer, resulting in a vacation of his suspended punishment and a reduction in rank to PVT / E-1. A bar to re-enlistment was also initiated against him on 17 July 2008, for his continued misconduct. He had shown enough improvement during your first 90-day review of his bar to re-enlistment that his company commander recommended that the bar be removed. Three weeks later he received notice of the CID investigation mentioned above. (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions Discharge (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 March 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 21 April 2009 / General, Under Honorable Conditions Discharge 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 5 August 2005 / 4 years and 25 weeks b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-2 / 63B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic / 3 years, 9 months, and 9 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Korea f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 1 April 2008, for having received a lawful order from SGT T.J., a noncommissioned officer, then known by him to be a noncommissioned officer, to write a 2000 word essay by 1700 hours, an order which it was his duty to obey, willfully disobeyed the same x2 (17 March 2008 and 9 October 2007); and without authority, absent himself from his appointed place of duty at which you were required to be, to wit: 0630 PT formation (11 October 2007); reduction to PVT / E-1 (suspended), extra duty and restriction 14 days On 17 July 2008, the suspension of punishment of reduction to PVT / E-1 was vacated for the new offense of being disrespectful in deportment towards SGT T.J., a noncommissioned officer, then known by him to be a noncommissioned officer, who was then in the execution of his office, by saying to him in a disrespectful manner "Jesus Christ," or words to that affect, when told to get off his cell phone (20 May 2008). The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: MEDCOM Form 4038 (Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation), dated 6 February 2009, indicates the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of depression by history. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by command. DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination), dated 6 February 2009, shows the applicant was experiencing major depression. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application (six 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 allows for separation for misconduct with paragraph 14-1 allowing for separating personnel because of minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, or absence without leave. Paragraph 14-2 states action will be taken to separate a Soldier for misconduct when it is clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him/her as a Soldier further effort is not likely to succeed; rehabilitation is impracticable or the Soldier is not amenable to rehabilitation. Paragraph 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 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 documented pattern of misconduct, 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 either the command's action was erroneous or the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. The applicant seeks relief contending, he was not given the proper chain of command support he needed to resolve issues he was experiencing during his enlistment; he was ignored, brushed off, or told, "there is nothing wrong with you" when trying to seek proper help; he was denied access to appointments; there were even times when his direct line NCO threatened his life and he felt these reasons were harmful to him, and led to his discharge. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support these contentions. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support these contention of no chain of command support, he was brushed off, denied access to appointments and his life being threatened by his first line supervisor. Further, 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 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: Letter of recommendation, dated 22 July 2016 – 1 page 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 25 July 2016, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length of service and testimony. 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 AR20150007490 5