1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 March 2016 b. Date Received: 28 March 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that his post deployment medical diagnosis and his in patient history. He desires to continue his education. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had a mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 July 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, arbitrary or capricious actions by the command (i.e. the applicant was deployed despite medical advice to remain behind for drug treatment), 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 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: 23 January 2015 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 30 December 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; being AWOL from (22 October 2014 to 23 October 2014); and he failed to report on divers occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 January 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 January 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 October 2011 / 3 years, 33 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / HS Graduate / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25Q10, Multichannel Transmission Systems Operator / Maintainer / 3 years, 3 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 1 December 2012 to 25 July 2013 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATO MDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15 dated, 11 December 2014, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x4 (21 October 2014, 19 November 2014, 19 November 2014 and 21 November 2014); and without authority, absented himself from his unit (22 October 2014 to 23 October 2014); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $765 pay for two months (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days. The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 1 day (22 October 2014 to 23 October 2014). However, this period is not annotated on the DD Form 214 block 29, dates of time lost during this period. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical Examination, dated 17 December 2012, revealed that the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, bipolar disorder and substance abuse. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 15 December 2014, shows that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of an adjustment disorder and polysubstance abuse. The service member was psychiatrically cleared for .any administrative action deemed appropriate by command, inclusive of chapter actions and specifically, inclusive of Chapter 14*l 2B. Behavioral Health patient discharge summary, dated 5 January 2015, relates that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of an adjustment disorder, polysubstance abuse (alcohol and cocaine), depressed mood, rule out mood disorder not otherwise specified versus bipolar I disorder; Axis II, cluster B traits; and Axis IV, occupational problems. He was prescribed medications for treatment of his conditions. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 149 (two pages); and behavioral health patient discharge summary (ten 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." "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 an upgrade of the characterization of service from 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 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 that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, his post deployment medical diagnosis and in patient history. The record of evidence shows that the applicant submitted several documents which revealed he was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, bipolar disorder, substance abuse, depressed mood and occupational problems. The applicant was prescribed medication for treatment of these conditions. The applicant desires to continue his education. 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 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 21 July 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, arbitrary or capricious actions by the command (i.e. the applicant was deployed despite medical advice to remain behind for drug treatment), 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 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 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 AR20160006565 5