1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 7 January 2016 b. Date Received: 12 January 2016 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 had PTSD after his deployment, he acted out, and that the Army was not prepared to deal with his PTSD nor did they get him help. The applicant states that he is starting a new family and is in need of an honorable discharge in order to apply for a home loan. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant had mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. The applicant was not diagnosed with PTSD while in service; however, he received treatment for Combat Stress symptoms, Depression, Insomnia, an Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct, and Alcohol Abuse upon returning from deployment. Because these behavioral health conditions can be associated with use of alcohol and substances for self-medication, impaired judgment, and impulsivity, there is a nexus between this applicant's misconduct and his behavioral health symptoms. Review of the military electronic medical records indicated use of behavioral health treatment and medication management. He started ASAP treatment in November 2005 and reported self-medicating with alcohol in response to combat stress symptoms. He acknowledged the negative impact of alcohol and the related incidents that had put his military career in jeopardy to include UCMJ action. VA medical records dated 15 December 2015 indicated the applicant was diagnosed with an acquired psychiatric disorder, PTSD, and alcohol abuse. He received a service-connected disability rating of 70 percent. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 April 2017, 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 service, to include his combat service, he was wounded in combat, earned a Bronze Star Medal with Valor and a Purple Heart, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of a partial upgrade to 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, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 17 May 2006 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 May 2006 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was found guilty of disobeying a lawful order from a commissioned officer, offering violence against a commissioned officer, and drunk and disorderly conduct during a Summary Courts-Martial held on 19 April 2006. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 May 2006 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 May 2006 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 March 2003 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91W10, Health Care Specialist / 3 years, 1 month, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (19 March 2004 to 18 March 2005) f. Awards and Decorations: BSM-V, PH, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, CMB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summary Court-Martial, dated 19 April 2006, reflects the applicant was arraigned on the following charges and specifications: Charge I: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 90 Specification I: Disobeying a Lawful Order for Commissioned Officer Plea: Not Guilty Finding: Guilty Specification 2: Offering Violence against a Commissioned Officer Plea: Not Guilty Finding: Guilty Charge II: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 134 Specification: Drunk and Disorderly Plea: Not Guilty Finding: Guilty Sentence adjudged: Reduction to E-1 and confinement for 30 days i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 26 days 3 days (AWOL, 21 February 2006 to 23 February 2006) / mode of return unknown 23 days (Confinement, 19 April 2006 to 12 May 2006) j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA document, dated 15 December 2015 reflects the applicant was diagnosed with an acquired psychiatric disorder, PTSD with alcohol abuse (also claimed as depression, anger, insomnia, and alcohol problems) and was assigned a 70 percent combined disabled rating. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; DD Form 214; letter, VA Summary of benefits; VA verification of applicant's service-connected disability letter; VA statement of service connected disabilities letter; VA progress notes; VA request for information; and VA Form 10-5345a (Individual's Request for a Copy of Their Own Health Information). 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 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 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 had PTSD after his deployment; he acted out, and that the Army was not prepared to deal with his PTSD. The record of evidence (VA document), shows that the applicant was diagnosed with an acquired psychiatric disorder diagnosed post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with alcohol abuse (also claimed as depression, anger, insomnia, and alcohol problems) and was granted a 70 percent combined disabled rating. The applicant further contends, he needs an honorable discharge to apply for a home loan and be better prepared to take care of his family. 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 Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 12 April 2017, 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 service, to include his combat service, he was wounded in combat, earned a Bronze Star Medal with Valor and a Purple Heart, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of a partial upgrade to 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: 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 AR20160001851 1