1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 30 August 2016 b. Date Received: 13 March 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 and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, from the moment he arrived at his unit, he was "gun-ho super hooah", but his NCOIC, warned him that he had "tough boots to fill," because two of her other Soldiers had won Soldier of the Quarter and Soldier of the Year. He states, he was very content with doing his job and not seeking to compete as he was in no way shape or form competitive. He believes it all started when his NCOIC bluntly asked him if he wanted to be like them. The applicant responded "Not really," knowing that it would not benefit him, for promotion purposes. After he declined, his NCOIC did not act the same way again. He states, eventually, after being away for a year, he went home to surprise his folks for New Year's, but when he returned, he suddenly was slammed left and right with counseling statements. He states the counseling were for petty things such as being late to work by a few minutes, or turning in a project a few hours late because it was not to her specifics of how to turn it in. Many of his counseling statements were uncalled for and a simple smoke session would have been more sufficient as he was told by other NCOs. These NCOs had also noticed her treating him unfairly, as if she were targeting him. He states that he noticed the females in his shop coming in late on a regular basis by 10 to 30 minutes and were simply excused by the NCOIC. In comparison to the rarity of his mere two to five minutes of being late, once every two to three months would result in counseling statements and corrective training. He believes this treatment was simply unfair and not equal in the way to which his NCOIC treated her female Soldiers. On other occasions his NCOIC would often be buddy-buddy with the females and would talk about women-power and more. When other male personnel would walk-in and state they did not believe that women should be in the Special Forces, his NCOIC would blow-up and begin to curse at them and would tell them "to get the fuck out of her shop." He believed this behavior to be unprofessional, yet he was being treated harsher than any females in or around the shop by his NCOIC. The applicant states that he was told that he was being discharged for misconduct and unsporting actions, which in his case was for missing a formation the day that he attempted suicide. He had missed both of his alarms and missed the Monday morning formation. After he missed the formation, two of the personnel from his shop called him to warn him to take whatever his NCOIC had for him lightly. He eventually grew tired of her mistreatment towards him and he had already went to his first sergeant and commander, but they said they believed anything their NCOs said over any average joe. He believed he had no outs, after completing punishment for an uncalled for Article 15, he tried to take his life by overdosing on sleeping pills and more. He was told that he had driven his vehicle into the gate of the post and crashed into the barriers. He only remembers taking the pills in his room and waking up in the hospital three days later hooked up to machines. Later that year, he went to court for his DUI, which was reduced to a "failure to operate in a careful manner ticket." His first sergeant and commander told him that the Army still looked at it as a DUI, even though, he was under side effects of Ambien, which were sleep walking and memory loss. He was only attempting suicide because he saw no means out, and only more punishment from someone who he and others considered as unequal and very much a sexist. 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 offense which led to his separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 December 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's incapacity to serve and in-service diagnosis of behavioral health issues. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 17 February 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 30 September 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 29 June 2015, the applicant drove a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol traveling east on Screaming Eagle Boulevard and subsequently struck the road side cable wire barrier. His blood alcohol content was .088 percent which is above the legal limit. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 January 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 11 February 2014 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / GED / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25M1P, Multimedia Illustrator / 2 years, 7 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 20 April 2015, for disobeying a lawful order (2 March 2015); derelict in the performance of his duties (5 February 2015); and, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (30 January 2015). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended); and, extra duty for 45 days. On 23 July 2015, the suspended portion of the punishment was vacated. The vacation was based on applicant failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 29 June 2015. Military Police Blotter (memo), dated 1 July 2015, reflects the applicant committed the following offenses: Driving Under the Influence; and, Traffic Accident with Damage to Government Property. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 13 August 2015, for driving a motor vehicle on 29 June 2015, in the state of Kentucky with a blood alcohol content of .088 percent, in violation of Kentucky law. It was totally unacceptable for him - a United States Army Soldier - to act in such an irresponsible manner. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online 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 14-12c 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 12c, misconduct (serious offense). 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 and a narrative reason change. 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 have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ"." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends that he was harrassed 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. Further, 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 applicant contends he was depressed and attempted suicide because he was unable to cope with the treatment from his NCOIC. However, the service record contains no evidence of depression or other diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. 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 6 December 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's incapacity to serve and in-service diagnosis of behavioral health issues. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 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 AR20160015074 1