1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 July 2017 b. Date Received: 27 December 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that his discharge should be upgraded based on he suffers from PTSD, TBI, and his family life was in shambles causing emotional and financial stress and hardship. He contends the military was in the process of a medical discharge for him due to these conditions but he was administratively discharged instead. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had history of concussion and trauma. Dx: PTSD, depression and TBI while in service. To determine the nexus between the applicant's PTSD, TBI and his misconduct, one would need to clarify the misconduct that resulted in the applicant's Court Martial. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 November 2017, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service and diagnoses of PTSD and TBI. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. This Board action entails restoration of grade/rank to E-4/CPL. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 22 June 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date Charges Were Preferred: 15 May 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The DD Form 458, Charge Sheet is not contained in the available record; however, a memorandum from the Staff Judge Advocate, dated 12 June 2012 shows the applicant was charged with larceny and disrespect towards a commissioned officer. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 June 2012 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 December 2010 / 2 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 35 / HS Graduate / 91 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic / 16 years, 5 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 9 January 1996 to 12 February 1996 / NA RA, 13 February 1996 to 12 February 1999 / HD ARNG, 13 February 1999 to 9 January 2001 / HD RA, 10 January 2001 to 1 May 2003 / HD RA, 2 May 2003 to 20 April 2009 / HD RA, 21 April 2009 to 8 December 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (13 March 2004 to 1 March 2005, 31 October 2006 to 30 January 2008, and 2 February 2009 to 29 January 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-4, AAM, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS-3, NOPDR, ASR, OSR-3 g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF; however, Department of Veterans Affairs documents submitted by the applicant show he was awarded 30 percent service connected disability for adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression (claimed as post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and anxiety) 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; statement in support of claim to Department of Veterans Affairs; disability rating documents from the Department of Veterans Affairs 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 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents several acts of significant achievements or valor; however, it appears it did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, that his discharge should be upgraded based on he suffers from PTSD, TBI, and his family life was in shambles causing emotional and financial stress and hardship. He contends the military was in the process of a medical discharge for him due to these conditions but he was administratively discharged instead. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, the fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered with while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. 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 29 November 2017, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service and diagnoses of PTSD and TBI. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. This Board action entails restoration of grade/rank to E-4/CPL. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions 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: E-4/CPL 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 AR20170001284 1