1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 March 2017 b. Date Received: 20 March 2017 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 misconduct was the result of his issues with PTSD. He contends he cannot target a single event from his deployment for PTSD other than his share of explosions. However, his biggest concern is that the deployment as a whole has done to him. It has become very hard for him to really care about producing and achieving in the society that he fought for. He has been attempting to work civilian jobs for a few years since his discharge and feels as though he does not have the best grasp of it. He is doing his best to find goals and achieve them for his family, but he always has a looming thought that he could die tomorrow, and it will have all been for nothing. It really makes it hard for him to try anything. He contend he was a very capable person and still is in many ways, but his service and combat has clearly effected his mental state. He has resorted to many substances to try and find a suitable perspective, but he usually ends up abusing the substance. His alcohol use even led to an incident that resulted in his discharge after a relatively long and honorable service. He had plans to be in the military for a whole career, but unfortunately his behavior was not acceptable to be a Soldier, and his physical health was also deteriorating because of his habits. He is still trying his best to integrate himself and his skills, but struggle every day in placing himself within a productive perspective. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service 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. The SM screened negative for PTSD and TBI and was psychiatrically cleared for administrative action. The SMs electronic military medical records indicated diagnoses of an Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood, however, his conditions are not mitigating for or reasonably related to the misconduct of physical assault or adultery. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 July 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 31 July 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 June 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for unlawfully striking PFC M. M., on the face with a closed fist between 5 February 2012 and 6 February 2012; and Wrongfully having sexual intercourse with E. M., a married woman not his wife, on 1 February 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 29 June 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 5 September 2008 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 114 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25S10, Satellite Communication Systems Operator Maintainer, 12B10, Combat Engineer / 6 years, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 18 July 2006 to 4 September 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (5 September 2007 to 22 October 2008 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR, CAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summary Court-Martial, dated 14 May 2012, for assault consummated by a battery between on 5 February 2012 and 6 February 2012, and adultery on 1 February 2012. The punishment consisted of reduction toe E-1, forfeiture of $994 for one month (suspended), and restriction for 60 days. Counseling statement reference suspension of favorable action and elimination under Chapter 14-12c. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 June 2012, shows the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I for adjustment disorder with depressed mood. It was noted that the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; DD Form 149; and self-authored statement. 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. 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 misconduct was the result of his issues with PTSD. He contends he cannot target a single event from his deployment for PTSD other than his share of explosions. However, his biggest concern is that the deployment as a whole has done to him. It has become very hard for him to really care about producing and achieving in the society that he fought for. He has been attempting to work civilian jobs for a few years since his discharge and feels as though he does not have the best grasp of it. He is doing his best to find goals and achieve them for his family, but he always has a looming thought that he could die tomorrow, and it will have all been for nothing. It really makes it hard for him to try anything. He contend he was a very capable person and still is in many ways, but his service and combat has clearly effected his mental state. He has resorted to many substances to try and find a suitable perspective, but he usually ends up abusing the substance. His alcohol use even led to an incident that resulted in his discharge after a relatively long and honorable service. He had plans to be in the military for a whole career, but unfortunately his behavior was not acceptable to be a Soldier, and his physical health was also deteriorating because of his habits. He is still trying his best to integrate himself and his skills, but struggle every day in placing himself within a productive perspective. The applicant's contentions were noted; the Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 June 2012, shows the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I for adjustment disorder with depressed mood and that could understand and participate in administrative proceedings. However, the service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder 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 record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service at the time of 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 13 July 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 AR20170005321 1