1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 June 2016 b. Date Received: 8 June 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 is also requesting to restore his full military benefits, including his rank of SFR/E-7. He was diagnosed with chronic PTSD on 22 February 2010; however, he deployed to Afghanistan in December 2011. He should have never deployed for the third time due to his medical condition. His chain of command was given the opportunity to medically retire him through MEB with an honorable discharge, but they chose not to. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. However, due to the nature of the misconduct, PTSD is not a likely cause of the misconduct. Therefore, a nexus between PTSD and the misconduct is not likely. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 January 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (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: 9 December 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 20 June 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He drove under the influence of alcohol on 22 February 2012, and was drunk on duty on 12 December 2012. On 17 October 2012, he resisted apprehension, unlawfully entered a personal residence, and communicated a threat. He failed to report to his appointed place of duty on divers occasions between 4 December 2012, and 12 December 2013. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions; on 15 October the battalion and brigade commanders recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and commented they did not believe PTSD contributed to the misconduct (4) Legal Consultation Date: Request for conditional waiver, dated 20 June 2013, contingent upon receiving a medical retirement was disapproved on 30 July 2013; (5) Administrative Separation Board: Request for conditional waiver, dated 20 June 2013, contingent upon receiving a medical retirement was disapproved on 30 July 2013, and on 27 August 2013, the Administrative Separation Board recommended discharge with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 30 October 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 November 2008 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 40 / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-7 / 25U30, Signal Support Systems Specialist / 23 years, 3 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR (19 January 1986 to 25 May 1987) / NIF RA (26 May 1987 to 25 August 1991) / HD USAR (26 August 1991 to 2 January 1999) / NA AGR (3 January 1999 to 2 July 2002) / NIF USAR (2 July 2002 to 4 February 2003 / HD RA (30 May 2003 to 9 February 2005) / HD RA (10 February 2005 to 5 November 2008) / HD (NIF) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (13 March 2004 to 14 March 2005), Afghanistan (15 January 2011 to 29 December 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: BSM; ARCOM-2; AAM-4; AGCM-2; NDSM-2; ACM-2CS; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; NCOPDR-2; ASR; OSR-4; CAB; NATOMDL; MUC g. Performance Ratings: Seven NCOERS rendered during period under current review: 1 January 2008 thru 31 December 2008, Among the Best 1 January 2009 thru 30 August 2009, Among the Best 1 January 2009 thru 1 November 2009, Among the Best 1 November 2009 thru 31 October 2010, Among the Best 1 November 2010 thru 31 October 2011, Among the Best 1 November 2011 thru 8 August 2012, RFC, Marginal 9 August 2012 thru 8 August 2013, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 7 October 2012, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for aggravated assault, resisting apprehension, unlawful entry, communicating a threat, cruelty to animals, and suicidal gestures. Supreme Court of the State of New York, Certificate of Disposition, dated 23 July 2012, certified that the applicant who operated a motor vehicle with an alcohol content of .08 or more, was convicted with a conditional discharge of one year, imprisonment for 55 days, and total fine of $500. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 7 August 2012, indicates the applicant was reprimanded for driving under the influence of alcohol on 22 February 2012. Orders 221-700, dated 8 August 2012, announced the applicant's reduction in grade from SFC to SSG, effective 8 August 2012, due to his civil conviction. Negative counseling statements for failing to report to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time and being drunk on duty. FG Article 15, dated 31 January 2013, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on several occasions on 4 and 12 December 2012, and being drunk on duty on 12 December 2012. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-5 (suspended), forfeiture of $1,532 pay per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Memorandum, dated 28 June 2013, subject: Dual Separation Under AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b, Patterns of Misconduct, and Paragraph 1-33, Medical Disability [the applicant], rendered by the unit commander, provided a summary of the applicant's dual process for separation, his enrollment/treatment by ASAP, rehabilitative transfer, and his continued faulting of his behavior issues and alcohol dependency to his PTSD. Report of Proceedings by Board of Officers that convened on 27 August 2013, reported their findings that warranted separation and a recommendation for a UOTH discharge. Memorandum, dated 30 October 2013, subject: Dual Separation Under AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, Commission of a Serious Offense and Paragraph 1-33, Medical Disability, [the applicant], a decision rendered by the separation authority, indicates the GCMCA approved the administrative separation board's findings and recommendation, and disapproved the MEB recommendation after determining the applicant's medical condition was not the direct or substantial contributing cause of the misconduct that led to the recommendations for his separation. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 37 days (Civil Confinement: 22 April 2012 to 28 May 2012) / released from confinement and reported for duty on 29 May 2012 j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Health Records, dated 5 and 22 February 2010, show diagnosis and treatment for chronic PTSD. Health Record, dated 16 July 2012, shows several behavioral health issue diagnoses. Report of Medical History, dated 27 February 2013, indicates the applicant and examiner noted behavioral health issues and treatment. Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings with a Narrative Summary and Psychiatric Addendum, dated 29 May 2013, listed several diagnoses, including PTSD, and recommended to refer the applicant to a Physical Evaluation Board. The findings and recommendation of the board were approved on 29 May 2013. Applicant's documentary evidence: VA decision letter, dated 15 June 2013, shows the applicant was assigned 70 percent evaluation for his PTSD. Health Record, dated 22 February 2010, shows a diagnosis of chronic PTSD. Treatment Center Discharge Orders for Active Duty, dated 17 January 2013, shows an "Axis I" diagnosis of "Alcohol dependence; PTSD by history." Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 February 2013, shows "AXIS I" diagnosis of "Anxiety Disorder NOS; R/O PTSD; R/O OCD." Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 5 June 2013, shows "AXIS I" diagnosis of "Anxiety Disorder NOS, PTSD, Alcohol Dependence (in Remission)." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), dated 6 June 2016; VA Decision letters, dated 15 June 2013 and 15 January 2016; Health Records, dated 22 February 2010, 19 August 2011, and 17 January 2013; Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 February 2013; Statement of Wartime Service; BSM certificate with Recommendation for Award; NCOER w/end date 20111031; and MEB Narrative Summary, dated 28 May 2013 and MEB Psychiatric Addendum, dated 23 April 2013. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service 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 a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment 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 characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors 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. Caution shall be exercised 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, and 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. By the serious incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service. The applicant contends he completed the MEB process and should have been medically retired. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. Further, the applicant's contentions that he was diagnosed with chronic PTSD in February 2010, and he should have not been deployed again in December 2011, and his chain of command chose not to medically retire him with an honorable discharge, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues along with notable service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. The separation authority considered the medical evidence, and determined that was not the case. The Board is not bound by the separation authority's finding in that regard, and can review that determination. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. 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 24 January 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a new DD-214/Issue new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160010772 1