1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 July 2016 b. Date Received: 5 July 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, during his more than five years in the Army he served honorably. He received multiple awards to include, but not limited to a good conduct medal. He was wrongfully court martialed due to the people he surrounded himself with. He was later found innocent during his hearing, but he was still separated from the Army. He served his country in Iraq for 13 months with pride and did the same while back in the states. He deserve an honorable discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had AHLTA diagnoses that included Acute Reaction to Stress, Alcohol Abuse, Alcohol Abuse in Remission, Alcoholism, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Insomnia related to Axis I/II Mental Disorder, Panic Disorder without Agoraphobia, and Sleep disturbances. He has no VA service connected disability percentages or diagnoses in JLV. He was being treated for Anxiety as early as 2008. In 2010 he was seen for increased drinking after returning from deployment and entered substance abuse evaluation, but no treatment was pursued at that time. He returned in August 2010 seeking evaluation and treatment for panic attacks. In October 2010, an AHTLA note indicated the applicant had self-referred to ASAP because of his drinking; however, the official diagnosis was Anxiety. On 31 March 2011, he had his first Alcohol Abuse diagnosis in AHLTA. He had his pre-discharge Mental Status Exam (MSE) on 22 January 2013. He was cleared for administrative discharge because of alcohol-related incidents, and he was also diagnosed as having Panic Disorder without Agoraphobia by history. He also had negative TBI and PTSD screens. He had a separation Medical Exam on 11 February 2013. The available records provided insufficient evidence that the applicant had a mitigating behavioral health condition at the time of his misconduct. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 September 2017, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 18 April 2013 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 26 March 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he was drunk while on duty (29 October 2012); he destroyed government property by urinating on a Soldier's mattress in his barracks room (14 March 2013); he failed to report to his appointed place of duty (14 March 2013); and additionally, he made false official statements to a noncommissioned officer and to a commanding officer and he failed to report back to his appointed place of duty after being told to do so (15 March 2013). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 April 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 April 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 3 October 2009 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / GED Certificate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19D10, Cavalry Scout / 13D10, Field Artillery Automation / 5 years, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 8 April 2008 to 2 October 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 1 February 2009 to 2 October 2009 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 6 November 2012, for being found drunk on duty as a scout (29 October 2012). The punishment consisted of reduction to PV2 / E-2, forfeiture of $835 pay for two months (suspended for 180 days) and extra duty for 45 days. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and initiation of separation action. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental status Evaluation, dated 22 January 2013, indicated that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of a panic disorder without agoraphobia (by history). He was screened for PTSD and mTBI, both screens were negative. He was cleared for administrative proceedings. Report of Medical Examination, dated 11 February 2013, indicated that the applicant was diagnosed with alcoholism, panic disorder and an anxiety disorder. Report of Medical History, dated 11 February 2013, showed that the applicant's physician indicated the applicant had significant behavioral health issues, panic disorder without agoraphobia, anxiety disorder, ETOH abuse / alcoholism. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); letter, Director, Case Management Division; and a DD Form 214. 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 his 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 he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, during his more than five years in the Army he served honorably; he received multiple awards to include, but not limited to a good conduct medal; he served his country in Iraq for 13 months with pride and did the same while back in the states. 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 further contends, he was wrongfully court martialed due to the people he surrounded himself with; he was later found innocent during his hearing, but he was still separated from the Army. The evidence of record shows the applicant's Summary Court-Martial on 26 February 2013, indicates that he was charged with one specification of violation of Fort Bliss Policy 27-5, prohibited conduct; and he was found not guilty. The applicant was discharged under the provision of chapter 14, pattern of misconduct, for 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 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 applicant also contends, he deserve an honorable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, 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. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual. 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 15 September 2017, 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. Change SPD/RE Code 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 AR20160012379 3