1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 March 2016 b. Date Received: 8 April 2016 c. Counsel: 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 a clean record and was a decorated war hero. Prior to his deployment, the applicant was informed that his mother had a heart attack and was on life support. The applicant took leave to go home to take care of family matters and upon his return to his unit, his unit was preparing to deploy. The applicant was asked by his first sergeant if he was good to deploy and he responded that he was; however, in reality, he was too numb to realize he was in no shape to deploy. Six months in to the deployment, the applicant still had not grieved; therefore, decided to seek help from the chaplain. The applicant alleges that, at one point, the chaplain proceeded to laugh at him, dismissing him by prescribing him with sleep and depression medication, which caused him to fall deeper into depression. The applicant contends that he began to keep everything inside and did what he had to do to get through the deployment. Towards the end of the deployment, the applicant received a Red Cross message notifying him that his father was on life support. The applicant went home on leave once again to take care of family matters. When he returned, the applicant states that he had an overwhelming feeling of anxiety; he knew he was not ready to go back to his unit and that he would not get the time he needed; therefore, he made the decision to go home to clear his head and to be near his family. Once the applicant returned to his unit, he informed his CSM that he believed it was better to leave and ask for forgiveness later. The applicant states that he received punishment, but his acting first sergeant held a grudge. The applicant's personal effects were not properly accounted for, they were tampered with and some were missing. The applicant provided a detailed description of the alleged harassment by his first sergeant ranging from signing in every hour in an attempt to deprive him of sleep, to making him sit outside the unit from sun up to sun down, to physically patting him down for listening devices. After three weeks of maltreatment, the applicant sought legal counsel over the matter, wherein he was advised to contact his CSM. The applicant believed his CSM was going to protect his first sergeant; therefore, he decided not to pursue the matter. The harassment continued and began to escalate. The applicant contends that his leadership complicated his grief by treating him like a prisoner and keeping him on suicide watch. Further contending that his CSM tried to unlawfully place him in jail, but was later released for a wrongful arrest. Following his discharge, the applicant was distant, angry, hurt, and lost who he really was. Eventually he started to heal and has fully come to grips with everything and learned to love and live life again. He has a family, cherishes every day and understands life is a gift. He has always loved the military, wanted to make a career out of it, and will again if given the opportunity. 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. A review of the military electronic medical records indicated the applicant was first seen by behavioral health in May 2011 due to grief and bereavement concerns regarding his mothers' death (paternal aunt died of heart attack- March 2010) and recent passing of his father (died of cancer- June 2011). He endorsed sadness, decreased interest, sleep disturbance, feeling numb, decrease in appetite, and hypervigilance. He also reported losing a close friend while deployed. He saw Combat Stress Control 3 times in theater for grief concerns. Medical note dated 12 July 2011 indicated the applicant reported feeling he was being treated unfairly by 1SG due to being made to stand to the side of formation and sitting behind and not with his company. The applicant reported crying and having panic attacks at work due to stress. July 2011 the applicant was inpatient hospitalized due to suicidal ideation, depression, and PTSD symptoms. He again reported feeling treated unfairly, verbal fighting with 1SG, and was not eating or sleeping. He attributed AWOL to wanting to be around his family and having to take care of fathers' estate. The applicant reported filing an IG complaint due to 1SG not allowing him to stand next to or talk with other Soldiers in his unit. He also missed the memorial of a friend due to being put on trash detail and being placed on extra duty for three months. He also reported financial stress due to losing pay when AWOL. Mental Status Eval dated 15 September 2011 indicated the applicant attributed misconduct to the passing of his father upon returning home from deployment. He was diagnosed with Bereavement without Complications. Because Bereavement/Depression, can be associated with avoidant behaviors (AWOL), irritability and maladaptive behaviors, there is a nexus between this applicant's misconduct and his behavioral health symptoms. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 May 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, severe family matters, and circumstances surrounding his AWOL (i.e. bereavement for losses of family members), 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 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 December 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 23 September 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: AWOL (15 June until 5 July 2011); failed to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty (21 June 2011); absent from his place of duty (between 12 and 22 August 2011); AWOL (23 August until 25 August 2011); disobeyed a direct order (26 August 2011); and, his conduct was of a nature to bring discredit to his unit and the United States Army. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 29 September 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 October 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 June 2010 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / GED / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 1 month, 2 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 23 September 2008 to 11 June 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (6 May 2010 to 15 February 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM, AAM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 3 August 2011, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (12 June and 14 July 2011) and AWOL (from 15 June until 5 July 2011). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $822 pay, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Offer to Plead Guilty, dated 31 August 2011, reflects the applicant agreed to plead guilty to the charges and their specifications in exchange, the Convening Authority agreed to refer the charges and their specifications to a Summary Court-Martial to separate the applicant from the Army with a characterization of service no less favorable than General (Under Honorable Conditions) and to reduce any adjudged confinement by 5 days for illegal pretrial confinement. Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial, dated 31 August 2011, reflects the applicant was charged with three specifications. The summary of offenses, pleas and findings: Violation of Article 86, AWOL: From 23 August 2011 to 25 August 2011; guilty, consistent with the plea; and, From 12 August 2011 to 22 August 2011; guilty, consistent with the plea. Violation of Article 91, Disobeyed a lawful order: On 26 August 2011; guilty, consistent with the plea. Sentence: Reduction to E-1; forfeiture $978 pay; and confinement for 25 days. Six Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Failure to Report (FTR)," effective 14 June 2011; From "FTR" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 15 June 2011; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 6 July 2011; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 23 August 2011; and, From "PDY" to "Civilian Military Authority (CMA)," effective 31 August 2011; and, From "CMA" to "PDY," effective 20 September 2011. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms for failing to report to his appointed place of duty at time prescribed on several occasions; indebtedness; lost meal card; leaving extra duty; gross misconduct; insubordination; disrespect; failing to obey instructions; inability to maintain discipline; and lying. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 48 days (AWOL, 15 June to 5 July 2011 and 23 August to 20 September 2011) / mode of return unknown j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 15 September 2011, 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) Bereavement without Complications. The applicant provided extracts of his Active Duty medical records, which reflect he was treated for Bereavement without complications; Anxiety Disorder NOS; and Sleep disturbance. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, with all allied documents listed in block 9 of the application. 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 14-12b 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 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 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 be retained on active duty. The applicant contends that he was harrased and discriminated by members of his chain of command; however, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. Accordingly, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant contends no one in his chain of command would help him. However, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non- judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. The applicant contends he was seeing a counselor to receive help coping. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a he had received treatment for bereavement and Anxiety disorder; however, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 15 September 2011, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined he knew the difference between right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. The applicant contends that he had good service, which included a combat tour. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends that he was having family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity 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 31 May 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, severe family matters, and circumstances surrounding his AWOL (i.e. bereavement for losses of family members), 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 AR20160007696 7