1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 25 May 2016 b. Date Received: 31 May 2016 c. Counsel: Yes 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 would like an upgrade of his discharge due to the fact he served his country and that the actions which resulted in his less than favorable discharge was due to his combat related experience. He contends he was recently assigned a service-connected disability rating of 70 percent for his combat related experience. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has had PTSD symptoms that mitigate his going AWOL in 2007. He receives treatment at the VA for PTSD, and his assessing psychologist also noted he was had a TBI from exposure to 2 bomb blasts during his time as an infantryman in Iraq. In childhood, the applicant had school difficulties, and spent his first five years in the Dominican Republic. He had difficulties as he continued in school, and, per a note available via the JVL, he had educational assistance and also had fights when in high school. He did not have a significant psychiatric history prior to service, despite his school difficulties. While in service, he said he attempted suicide in 2007. He also attempted suicide again in 2012. He is now rated 70 percent disabled by the VA, 50 percent for service-connected PTSD, and is in treatment for it. Because of his PTSD, he had his Under Other Than Honorable discharge upgraded to a General Discharge, with his PTSD mitigating his AWOL in 2007, as it is thought soldiers with PTSD sometimes go AWOL as a form of avoidance. No fresh facts bear on whether his PTSD mitigates his four month AWOL to further upgrade his discharge to Honorable In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 December 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of service, to include his combat service, his personal testimony, post-service accomplishments, and his service-connected VA disability rating of 50 percent for diagnosed PTSD. 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 27 July 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 23 January 2009, reflects the applicant was charged with violation of the UCMJ, Article 86. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Charge: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, AWOL (9 January 2007 until 9 May 2007) (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 May 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: None (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 July 2007 / Under Other Than Honorable Note: The record indicates that the applicant had a prior records review conducted on 8 December 2015. The Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on length and quality of the applicant’s service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge; therefore, the applicant was granted an upgrade to general (under honorable conditions). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 October 2003 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 107 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 5 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA, Germany / Iraq (17 November 2005 to 15 November 2006) (noted from prior record review) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c(2). The applicant’s self-authored statement to the court-martial convening authority, undated. Two DA Forms 4187, dated 11 and 24 May 2007, reflect the applicant’s duty status changed from “Ordinary Leave” to “AWOL,” effective 8 January 2007, and from “DFR” to “Attached/Present for Duty,” effective 9 May 2007. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 121 days (AWOL, 8 January 2007 to 8 May 2007) / The applicant surrendered to military authorities. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: My HealtheVet medical documents, page 41 of 79, reflect the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD in 2011. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and My HealtheVet medical documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. 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 his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge originally received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulation guidance. However, it was later determined during the applicant’s prior records review that the characterization of service was too harsh based on length and quality of the applicant’s service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge and the AWOL incident, (i.e., documentary evidence of his suicide attempt and severe depression along with notable Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms). It was concluded that the other behavioral health issues may have been a causative factor in the misconduct that led to the discharge. After carefully weighing these facts against the severity of the applicant’s misconduct, the applicant’s characterization of service was upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor; it did not support the issuance of an honorable by the separation authority at the time of discharge or at the time of his prior records review. The applicant contends that he was recently assigned a service-connected disability rating of 70 percent for his combat related experience. The fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. 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 documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentions. b. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 December 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of service, to include his combat service, his personal testimony, post-service accomplishments, and his service-connected VA disability rating of 50 percent for diagnosed PTSD. 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. 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 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 AR20160010443 5