1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 11 January 2017 b. Date Received: 19 January 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, claims his undesirable discharge was related to his mental health. He now understands the cause and effect of PTSD and that deploying soon after completing basic training, took a toll on him physically and mentally. He states, he had no guidance or treatment, which contributed to his negative actions. The applicant further contends that an upgrade would allow him to receive military benefits, which would help him live a healthy life style both mentally and physically. He believes as a combat veteran, it is only fair for the military to give back to him for all he has given the military. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant does not have a mitigating behavioral health condition for his misconduct. While he was diagnosed with Acute Stress Reaction (ASR) while in the military, there is no nexus between ASR and being involved in a drive by shooting. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 July 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 22 October 2014 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 August 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He participated in a drive-by shooting at Champion's Sports Bar in Tacoma, Washington, and lied to a Lakewood Police Officer about his involvement on 13 October 2013. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 6 August 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 12 September 2014, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 24 September 2014, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant's discharge with characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. On 8 October 2014, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 October 2014 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 30 April 2012 / 3 years, 17 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 85 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19K10, R4 M1 Armor Crewman / 2 years, 5 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (7 November 2012 - 10 June 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Lakewood Police Department Incident Report, dated 14 October 2014, reflects the applicant was a passenger in a vehicle that was involved in a drive-by shooting and lied to the police about his involvement. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 1 day (NIF, 13 January 2014) / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 July 2014, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with an Acute Stress Reaction (Axis I). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; copies of his military service records; and two reference letters. 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. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). 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 be retained on Active Duty. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Acute Stress Reaction; however, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 14 July 2014, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that, he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow him to receive veteran's benefits, which would help him live a healthy life style both mentally and physically. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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 12 July 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 a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change d. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. 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 AR20170004961 5