1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 16 February 2017 b. Date Received: 4 May 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, wishes to have the discharge changed for the family and oneself to reflect who the applicant was and what the applicant did as a Soldier especially all the time in combat. The applicant contends that there was never enough evidence for the applicant to be charged with several Article's 15, the applicant was targeted by Army leadership over the course of being at USCENTCOM, and the applicant should have been MEB, MMRB several times and was declined by leadership after sustaining multiple injuries during combat. The Company Commander had extended the applicant's service time to make a separation board even though the applicant was QMP 1 1/2 years earlier in March 2013. The applicant has had several new medical aliments come up that were ignored, such as 35+ seizures, but still remained on Active Duty and several investigations were done by other branch with poor results; several were incomplete and not completed fully. Some members fabricated statements. The applicant believes this was an error on the government's part as the board did not have conclusive evidence to go further with a GD. There are several documents that support how the applicant was supposed to be medically retired, but those were thrown to the side as the applicant waited two years for a separation board. The applicant attended a MEB in 2010 and was kept in the Army due to clearance level, instead of retired at that current time. The applicant has had several sever injuries to include neck, back, shoulder, knees, ribs, chest, legs, and feet. The record is included in these documents plus evaluations to provide insight on the Soldier the applicant is. The applicant served several times in Afghanistan and Iraq receiving two Valorous Awards plus several others. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Alcohol Related Disorder and Alcohol Abuse. The applicant is 100% service-connected; 30% for PTSD from the VA. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnosis is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 23 August 2019, 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-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 22 December 2016 c. Separation Facts: Documents submitted by the applicant (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 16 May 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for receiving non-judicial punishment for transmitting explicit, degrading, humiliating and demeaning electronic mail messages using US Government computer networks to members of his directorate about a service member within the directorate on or about 19 November 2014, and transmitting electronic mail messages using US Government computer networks with explicit, degrading, humiliating and demeaning content about homosexuals to members in his directorate on or about 23 September 2014; On diverse occasions between on or about 1 March 2013 and 5 November 2014, he used humiliating, and derogatory terms such as "faggot," "fat fuck," and "fuck face" toward service members in his directorate; Between on or about 1 June 2013 and on or about 5 November 2014, in front of other members from his directorate, he call a service member crazy, and noted that said service member "saw dead people," or words to that effect; Received non-judicial punishment on 6 January 2016, for making false official statements to a senior noncommissioned officer and field grade officer by asserting that he had been given clearance to drive by his neurologist. The misconduct occurred between on or about 1 March 2015 and on or about 15 June 2015; Receiving non-judicial punishment on 31 March 2016, for assaulting his wife by hitting her in the face with a TV remote control and a water bottle. This misconduct occurred on 5 February 2016 (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF; documents submitted by the applicant contains a unsigned document. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 25 August 2016, an administrative separation board having carefully considered the evidence, finds: The allegation that on or about 23 September 2014 the applicant transmitted explicit, degrading, humiliating, and demeaning electronic mail messages using US Government computer networks to members of his directorate about homosexuals was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (this finding did not warrant the separation of the applicant); The allegation that on or about 19 November 2014, the applicant transmitted explicit, degrading, humiliating, and demeaning electronic mail messages using US Government computer networks to members of his directorate about a service member within the directorate was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (this finding did not warrant the separation of the applicant); The allegation that the applicant used humiliating and derogatory terms such as "faggot," "fat fuck," and "fuck face" toward service members on multiple occasions between on or about 1 March 2013 and on or about 5 November 2014 was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (this finding did not warrant the separation of the applicant); The allegation that the applicant called a service member crazy and said that the service member "saw dead people," or words to that effect, between on or about 1 June 2013 and 5 November 2014 was not supported by a preponderance of the evidence (this finding did not warrant the separation of the applicant); The allegation that the applicant made false official statements to a senior noncommissioned officer and a field grade officer by stating he had been given clearance to drive by his neurologist, which actions resulted in him being found guilty in an Article 15 hearing on or about 6 January 2016, was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (this finding did not warrant the separation of the applicant); and The allegation that the applicant hit his wife in the face with a TV remote control and a water bottle on or about 5 February 2016, which actions resulted in him being found guilty in an Article 15 hearing on or about 31 March 2016, was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (this finding did warrant the separation of the applicant). In view of the above findings, the board recommended that the applicant be separated from the United States Army with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On1 September 2016 having reviewed the separation packet and consideration of all the matters the separation authority directed the applicant be separated from the Army prior to the expiration of his current term of service and that his service be characterized as General (Under Honorable Conditions). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 January 2012 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 32 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 35G10, Geospatial Intelligence Imagery Analyst, 11B10 Infantryman / 15 years, 10 months, 3 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 20 February 2001 to 4 August 2003 / HD RA, 5 August 2003 to 7 September 2005 / HD RA, 8 September 2005 to 19 October 2007 / HD RA, 20 October 2007 to 5 January 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Afghanistan (15 January 2002 to 15 July 2002 and 15 November 2012 to 11 April 2013) and Iraq (14 February 2003 to 22 November 2003 and 7 April 2007 to 29 May 2008) f. Awards and Decorations: MSM, ARCOM-V Device-2, ARCOM-5, JSAM, AAM-2, JMUA-3, MUC, VUA, AGCM-4, ACM-2CS, ICM-2CS, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NOPDR-2, CIB g. Performance Ratings: 1 March 2007 to 29 February 2008 / Among The Best 23 February 2008 to 24 September 2008 / Among The Best 25 September 2008 to 24 September 2009 / Among The Best 25 September 2009 to 24 September 2010 / Among The Best 25 September 2010 to 26 May 2011 / Among The Best 27 May 2011 to 26 December 2012 / Among The Best 27 December 2012 to 26 December 2013 / Among The Best 27 December 2013 to 26 December 2014 / Fully Capable 27 December 2014 to 31 March 2016 / Not Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 31 March 2016, for unlawfully striking K.B.P., on the face with a remote control and water bottle. The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-4 and forfeiture of $1,241.70 per month for two months (suspended). FG Article 15, dated 16 March 2015, for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully transmitting electronic mail messages to members of his directorate with explicit, degrading, humiliating and demeaning content about homosexuals in an effort to exclude or reject Petty Officer N.M., on 19 November 2014, by wrongfully transmitting to member of his directorate an electronic mail message with the degrading, humiliating and demanding comment "what the F*@k is wrong with you reference SGT B.W. 23 September 2014, and by wrongfully using US Government computer networks to transmit electronic mail messages with explicit, degrading, humiliating and demeaning content about homosexuals to member in his directorate 19 November 2014. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-5 (suspended), forfeiture of $600 pay for one month, and extra duty for 10 days FG Article 15, dated 6 January 2016, for making false official statements to a senior noncommissioned officer and field grade officer, by asserting that he had been given clearance to drive by his neurologist on 1 March 2015 and 15 June 2015. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-5 and forfeiture of $1,562.85 (suspended for two months). Notification of Denial of Continue Active Duty Service under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP), dated 29 April 2016. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 March 2016, which indicates the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for alcohol use disorder, moderate (by history). It was noted that the diagnosis was not a medically board-able diagnosis. There was no psychiatric disease or defect that warrant disposition through medical channels IAW AR 40-501, standards of medical fitness. There were no psychiatric symptoms sufficient to require hospitalization, necessitate limitations of duty, or interfere with effective military service. The applicant was mentally sound and able to appreciate any wrongfulness in his conduct and to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. He was considered accountable for his actions and subject to the normal channels of counseling and discipline. He had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board or other administrative proceedings. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for chapter separation. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; DD Form 149; several NCOER's; ERB; several medical document; several letters of support; QMP letters; copy of emails; DD Form 214; Valor Awards / award certificates; service school evaluation reports; . 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 he wish to have his discharge changed for his family and himself to reflect who he was and what he did as a Soldier especially all his time in combat. The applicant contends that there was never enough evidence for him to be charged with several Article's 15, that he was targeted by Army leadership over the course of his time at USCENTCOM, that he should have been MEB, MMRB several times and was declined by leadership are sustain multiple injuries during combat. His Company Commander had extended his service time to make a separation board even though he was QMP 1 1/2 years earlier in March 2013. He contend he has had several new medical aliments come up that were ignored, such as 35+ seizures but still remained on Active Duty and several investigations were done by other branch with poor result, several were incomplete and not completed fully. Some members fabricated statements. He believes this was an error on the government's part as the board did not have conclusive evidence to go further with a GD. There are several documents that support how he was supposed to be medical retired, those were thrown to the side as he waited two years for a separation board. He attended a MEB in 2010 and was kept in the Army due to his clearance level instead of retired at that current time. He has had several sever injuries to include neck, back, shoulder, knees, ribs, chest, legs, and feet. His record is included in these documents plus his evaluations to provide insight on the Soldier he is. He served several times in Afghanistan and Iraq receiving tow Valorous Awards plus several others. The applicant's contentions were noted; 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 on his accomplishment. However, 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. It should be noted; the Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 March 2016, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for alcohol use disorder, moderate (by history). It was noted that the diagnosis was not a medically board-able diagnosis. There was no psychiatric disease or defect that warrant disposition through medical channels IAW AR 40-501, standards of medical fitness. There were no psychiatric symptoms sufficient to require hospitalization, necessitate limitations of duty, or interfere with effective military service. The applicant was mentally sound and able to appreciate any wrongfulness in his conduct and to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. He was considered accountable for his actions and subject to the normal channels of counseling and discipline. He had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board or other administrative proceedings. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for chapter separation. The record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication at the time of discharge. The evidence of record shows separation action was initiated against the applicant as a result of several acts of misconduct; there is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. In fact, the applicant's three Articles 15 justify a pattern of misconduct. The applicant's incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 23 August 2019, 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 AR20170010342 7