1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 March 2017 b. Date Received: 17 March 2017 c. Counsel: None 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 had mental and physical conditions which had not been diagnosed while he was in the service. One of the symptoms of his psychiatric condition was memory loss and because of these conditions, he faced a lot of punitive action. He was ill and his behavior reflected as such. He sought treatment for these conditions while in the military and was rated 60 percent disabled by the VA. 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 did not have a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 June 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: 27 March 2015 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 20 February 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he purposely destroyed his Combined Access Card (CAC) (1 May 2014)); he disobeyed a noncommissioned officer x4 (8 September 2014, 6 March 2014, 10 March 2014, and 28 March 2014); he failed to report to his appointed place of duty on x2 (11 March 2014 and 27 March 2014; he was derelict in the performance of his duties x2 (20 March 2014 and 28 March 2014); and he failed to obey a lawful order x2 (26 April 2014 and 28 November 2014). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 25 February 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 29 July 2013 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 years / HS Graduate / 117 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 09B10, Trainee Unassigned / 1 year, 7 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 25 April 2014, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (27 March 2014), having received a lawful order from SGT C.H., a noncommissioned officer, to stay with SPC O'C., and assist with patient care, or words to that effect, an order which it was your duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same (28 March 2014); and who knew of his duties, were derelict in the performance of those duties, in that he willfully failed to assist with patient care because he was sleeping in the conference room, as it was his duty to do (28 March 2014); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $357 pay for one month, extra duty and Restriction for 14 days. CG Article 15, dated 15 January 2015, for having knowledge of a lawful order issued by CPT G.R, an order which it was his duty to obey, did fail to obey the same by wrongfully having liquor in the barracks (28 November 2014); extra duty and restriction for 14 days. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and his pending separation action. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 October 2014, relates the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (per history as reflected in AHLTA) and Axis II cluster B personality disorder. He was screened for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and mild Traumatic Brain Injury, both screens were negative. He met medical fitness standards for retention defined in AR 40-501, chapter 3- 31, 3-32, 3-33, 3-34, and 3-37. He also had a history of being diagnosed with ADHD and was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and cluster B personality disorder in May 2014. He could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and could appreciate the difference between right and wrong. VA entitlement Letter, dated 27 January 2017, relates that the applicant was granted a 50 percent disabling rating for an unspecified depressive disorder with unspecified anxiety disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 214; and a letter, entitlement to VA benefits (six 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 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. 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 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 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, he had mental and physical conditions which had not been diagnosed while he was in the service. The record shows that on 8 October 2014, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he, relates the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (per history as reflected in AHLTA) and Axis II cluster B personality disorder The applicant further contends, one of the symptoms of his psychiatric condition was memory loss and because of these conditions, he faced a lot of punitive action; he was ill and his behavior reflected as such. The available medical documents contained in the record contains no evidence of memory loss and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that memory loss was the reason for his misconduct or that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant additionally contends, he sought treatment for these conditions while in the military and was rated 60 percent disabled by the VA. The record shows that the applicant submitted a VA document that indicates he was granted a 50 percent disabling rating for an unspecified depressive disorder with unspecified anxiety disorder. His overall combined rating was 60 percent, effective 21 April 2016. 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 27 June 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 a 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 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 AR20170004560 1