1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 7 December 2015 b. Date Received: 14 December 2015 c. Counsel: Yes 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he joined the Army, because he felt it was his duty to serve his country during a time when it was needed most. Ten months after he joined, he was assigned to an infantry unit and deployed to Afghanistan for a 12 month tour. He served with honor and integrity. During his tour, he was subject to the same combat stress and horrific experiences as many of his fellow Soldiers. He was willing to bear the burden for the price of freedom. When he returned home, that burden began to take its toll. He was suffering from depression, anger outbursts, and chronic levels of anxiety. He didn't understand these feelings or his body’s reaction to the stress of combat. Because of the stress, he began to lose his bearing and forgot why he joined the Army. Everything seemed centralized around the anger and fear he felt. Because he did not have the coping skills to address those issues he acted out. On 30 July 2012, he began seeking treatment at the Department of Behavioral Medicine on Fort Stewart. He attended 41 sessions with his mental health professional trying to figure out why he was acting in a manner that he didn't understand. He was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotion. This diagnosis would later be recognized by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as PTSD. He cannot contribute all of his actions to PTSD, but he does concede that many of the incidents were side effects of his treatment and his reaction to many of the situations which led to his discharge. On several occasions, he was counseled and reprimanded for failure to report. Each of these infractions occurred in the morning. What was never taken into consideration was the fact that he was prescribed medication to aid his sleep due to chronic nightmares. It took several months of adjusting his dosage to find the right amount that would help him sleep, but not inhibit his ability to make for morning formation. Because the dosage was so strong to compensate for his poor sleep, he could not hear the alarm go off to wake him up. Due to his depression, anxiety, and poor sleeping habits, he found it hard to control his temper. He would feel his anger growing until he wanted to explode. Each time he was counseled for failure to report and each time he was reprimanded for misconduct that was a result of his inadequate coping skills. Since his discharge, he has continued to seek treatment and constantly works towards overcoming the symptoms of this debilitating condition. Reflecting back, he realizes the stress of combat impaired his mental, emotional and physical, cognitive and occupational level of functioning. It was through therapy and pharmacological treatment that he was able to improve his level of functioning. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has a behavioral health diagnosis which may have been mitigating for some, but not all, of the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. The applicant has a diagnosis of PTSD from the VA. Based on findings from his electronic medical records, he likely had subclinical or undiagnosed PTSD while still on Active Duty. Because PTSD can be associated with avoidance behaviors, defiance and/or disobedience of authority figures, there was a possible nexus between the applicant's failure to obey an order, failure to report, and leaving his place of duty. However, making deliberate false statements and talking on the phone while driving on base are not characteristic of PTSD. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 August 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 his service, to include his combat service, and circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post service diagnosis of PTSD). 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 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 31 January 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 January 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: made a false official statement (17 June 2012) failed to obey lawful order (27 August 2012, 9 December 2012) received a ticket for talking on cell phone while driving on base (14 July 2012) left his place of duty (27 August 2012, 5 December 2012) failed to report (20, 21, 27 and 28 November 2012; 10 and 18 December 2012) (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 11 January 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 16 January 2013, General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 14 January 2010 / 4 years, 16 days b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 102 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years and 17 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Afghanistan (29 November 2010 - 28 November 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: JSAM, NATO Medal, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 29 June 2012, for making a false official statement (on or about 17 June 2012). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended); forfeiture of $389.00 pay (suspended); extra duty and restriction for 14 days (suspended). On 14 September 2012, the suspended portions of punishment were vacated. The vacation was based on the applicant failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (27 August 2012) and for willfully disobeying a lawful order (27 August 2012). FG Article 15, dated 20 December 2012, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty (20, 21, 27 and 28 November 2012); for failing to obey a lawful order (5 December 2012); and, smoking in the barracks (9 December 2012). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $745.00 pay; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Numerous Developmental Counseling Statements (DA Form 4856), dated between 21 November 2012 and 18 December 2012 for: Failure to report; traffic ticket for using cell phone while driving; smoking in the barracks; disrespect; and insubordination. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: The applicant provided an extract of his medical records, dated 10 October 2012, which reflects the applicant had the following chronic problems: Adjustment Disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct Adjustment Disorder Organic insomnia DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 7 January 2013, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct Fort Stewart Department of Behavioral Medicine letter, dated 21 April 2015, reflects the applicant was treated from 30 July 2012 through 25 January 2013 and was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions. VA Disability Rating Decision letter, dated 19 August 2015, reflects the applicant was rated at 50 percent for PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 7 December 2015; DD Form 214; copies of his military records; extract of his medical records; a self-authored statement; VA disability rating decision letter, dated 18 August 2015; and Fort Stewart Department of Behavioral Medicine letter, dated 21 April 2015. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has maintained steady employment. 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 requests upgrade of his 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 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 contends, in effect, he was suffering from PTSD at the time of his discharge. The applicant provided evidence to support a PTSD diagnosis. The applicant underwent a mental status evaluation on 7 January 2013, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct (Axis I). However, it appears the applicant’s chain of command determined that although he was suffering from PTSD, he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. 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 26 August 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 his service, to include his combat service, and circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post service diagnosis of PTSD). 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. 10. 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: No Change 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 AR20160001158 6