1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 October 2016 b. Date Received: 28 October 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, that his discharge should be upgraded because it is inequitable based on it being a onetime isolated incident in 20 months of service with no other adverse action towards him. He contends his discharge does not reflect his character and reputation that he exemplified over his time of service. He believes every day he showed the utmost respect towards his peers and chain of command; he was never late to any formation or briefing, and he always made sure he was one hundred percent focused on the mission at hand. He was placed in leadership roles multiple times and excelled at that role every single time. He feels that an honorable discharge would be appropriate because his 20 months of service were highly positive and that one incident should not reflect an entire time of service. He believes that a change of his characterization of service would be in the best interest for himself and his future, and that one isolated incident should not be a representation of his service to the United States of America. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time including the applicant's case file, AHLTA and JLV. AHLTA notes indicate applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood in June 2011 after overdosing on Tylenol. He reported breaking up with his girlfriend two weeks previously. Also reported a past history of being suspended from college after attending for 3.5 years due to getting in a fight and throwing a chair through a window. Reported to admitting physician that his adoptive father was an alcoholic. Reported he joined the Army to help parents financially. In Sep 2011, applicant was referred to ASAP after repeatedly punching and eventually breaking a German ATM machine screen while intoxicated. He was diagnosed with Alcohol Abuse. Reported he began drinking at age 14. In Feb 2012, he was tested with a Breathalyzer at work and found to have a BAC of 0.16. He stated he had been drinking heavily the night before. In April 2012, he was seen by Psychiatry after being hospitalized at a German hospital for ingesting 15 naproxyn tablets while intoxicated. He was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. VA records contain no date regarding applicant. Based on the available information, the applicant does not have a mitigating BH disorder. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 June 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 1 May 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: committing assault on 20 August 2011; Willfully and wrongfully damaging private property on 6 October 2011; and Being incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties due to prior overindulgence in liquor on 3 February 2012 (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 May 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 23 May 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 October 2010 /3 years, 18 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 111 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 13 B10, Cannon Crewmember / 1 year, 8 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 10 August 2011, which shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for damage to private property. CG Article 15, dated 11 October 2011, for willfully and wrongfully damaging the monitor of an ATM by striking it with a closed fist, of a value of more than $500, the property of Sparkasse Bank on 16 July 2011. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $342 pay per month for one month, and 14 days extra duty and restriction. FG Article 15, dated 5 March 2012, for overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or drug, incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties on 3 February 2012. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $745 pay per month for two months, and 45 days extra duty and restriction. The applicant received a negative counseling statement reference separation actions. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 April 2012, which shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for Occupational Problem. It was noted that there was no evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder of sufficient severity to warrant his unfit for duty from a behavioral health perspective IAW AR 40-501. The applicant was mentally responsible, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate intelligently as a respondent in any administrative proceedings. The applicant was psychologically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by the separation authority. 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 14-12b 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. 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, 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. 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 that his discharge should be upgraded because it is inequitable based on being a onetime isolated incident in 20 months of service with no other adverse action towards him. He contends his discharge does not reflect his character and reputation that he exemplified over his time of service. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, the service record indicates the applicant committed several discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 and the applicant is to be commended. It should be noted by regulation, a under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct. It appears the applicant's generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge. 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 5 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 AR20160016948 1