1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 June 2016 b. Date Received: 20 June 2016 c. Counsel: 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, he was suffering from PTSD upon his discharge. He drank to self-medicate from the horrors of war. The VA awarded him a disability rating for PTSD retroactive to the date of discharge. He desires that education benefits be reinstated. 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 a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. Because behavioral health conditions, particularly PTSD and depression, can be associated with use of alcohol for self-medication, there is a nexus between this applicant's misconduct and his behavioral health symptoms. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 25 September 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in- service diagnosis of PTSD (existed prior to service) exacerbated by service and combat and a 30% service-connected disability rating from the VA for PTSD) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (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 March 2014 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 25 November 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; he wrongfully operated a motor vehicle while the alcohol concentration in his breath was shown by an administered breathalyzer test to be .151 percent breath alcohol content (exceeding the legal limit of .08 grams per 210 liters, 11 July 2013). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 5 December 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: The GCMCA reviewed the enclosed administrative separation packet and the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) proceedings pertaining to the applicant to determine whether he should be processed under administrative separation provisions of AR 635-200, or processed through the physical disability system under the provisions of AR 635-40, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation, 8 February 2006. Based on a careful review of the above referenced matters and the medical examination of the applicant, the GCMCA determined that the medical condition outlined in the MEB was not a direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct which led to the recommendation for administrative separation. Additionally, he determined that there are no other circumstances within this individual case that warrant disability processing under the provisions of AR 635-40 instead of completion of administrative separation under the provisions of AR 635-200. The GCMCA, directed that the case be processed under the appropriate administrative separation provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 14. On 27 February 2014, the SCMCA directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 29 June 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 years / HS Graduate / 86 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25L10, Cable System Installer / Maintainer / 3 years, 8 months, 19 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 11 March 2011 to 8 December 2011 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, MUC g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 22 March 2013, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (11 March 2013); and with intent to defraud, alter a certain individual sick slip DD Form 689 by changing the date of an individual sick slip DD Form 689 in the following words and figures, by adding thereto, 13 March until 18 March 2013, which said no duty until 0730 10 March 2013, and light duty until 18 March 2013 (7 March 2013); reduction to PFC / E-3, forfeiture of $949 pay for one month, extra duty and restriction for 30 days. This Article 15 is not contained in the available record, see unit commander's recommendation memorandum. Military Police Report, dated 23 July 2013, shows that the applicant was the subject of an investigation for drunken driving, off post. An administrative General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 9 September 2013, for being apprehended for operating a motor vehicle in Richmond County, Georgia, while apparently under the influence of alcohol. Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES), dated 25 January 2014, shows that the applicant had not displayed any visible signs of having PTSD. His work performance when he first arrived to unit was poor and leadership continued to see this trend. He displays laziness and lack of drive to work in several tasks. A negative counseling statement for commission of a serious offense; monthly counseling statements for November and December 2013. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 3 September 2013, shows that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of occupational problem. There was some indication of significant behavioral health symptoms or history of PTSD/TBI at the time. He was not psychiatrically cleared for administrative proceedings at the present time with further evaluation needed. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 4 October 2013, relates that the applicant was not psychiatrically cleared for administration separation at this time but he is psychiatrically cleared to participate in other administrative proceedings. There was no data suggesting the initial findings/recommendations should be changed. He continues to have significant behavioral health concerns, requires further evaluation to determine diagnosis, prognosis, treatment planning, and fitness for duty. Initial PTSD disability benefits questionnaire, dated 11 December 2013, indicates diagnosis number 1 of PTSD and number 2 of alcohol use disorder, moderate to severe (alcohol dependence). Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings, 14 January 2014, revealed that the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. He failed to meet retention standards in accordance with AR 40-501 Chapter 3, paragraph 33b and c. It was determined the condition existed prior to service and it was service aggravated. The case was referred to the PEB for further processing. VA entitlement benefits, dated 5 February 2016, shows that the applicant was granted a 30 percent disabled rating for service connected PTSD, effective 18 March 2014. Social Work Note, dated 23 March 2016, shows that the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD and alcohol use disorder. He was prescribed medication for treatment of these conditions. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); letter, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA); DD Form 214; social work note (three pages); and a VA, entitlement decision (five 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 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 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 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 was suffering from PTSD upon his discharge. The record of evidence shows that an MEB was conducted and evidence of PTSD introduced. The GCMCA reviewed the applicant's administrative separation packet and the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) proceedings, pertaining to the applicant, to determine whether he should be processed under administrative separation provisions of AR 635-200, or processed through the physical disability system under the provisions of AR 635-40, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation, 8 February 2006. Based on a careful review of the matters and the medical examination of the applicant, the GCMCA determined that the medical condition outlined in the MEB was not a direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct which led to the recommendation for administrative separation. The GCMCA, directed that the case be processed under the appropriate administrative separation provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 14. The VA awarded him a disability rating for PTSD retroactive to the date of discharge. The applicant was granted a 30 percent disabled rating for service connected PTSD, effective 18 March 2014. The applicant desires that his education benefits be reinstated. 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 25 September 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of PTSD (existed prior to service) exacerbated by service and combat and a 30% service-connected disability rating from the VA for PTSD) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a e. Change SPD/RE Code to: Change SPD to JKN / No change to RE code f. Restore 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 AR20160011938 1