1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 June 2017 b. Date Received: 30 June 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, the legal office stated that something was going on with the Soldier's documents that his unit provided. His unit recommended that he get this situated, because it was illegal what the Soldier's unit did unto him by issuing him a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder. However, due to the nature of the behavioral health conditions, this does not mitigate the misconduct. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 17 August 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Condition, Not A Disability / AR 635- 200 / Chapter 5, Paragraph 5-17 / JFV / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 March 2016 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 24 February 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he experienced a pattern of maladjustment to the unit and Army culture. Despite adequate time to adjust and engaging in behavioral health services / psychotherapy since July 2015, he has experienced various levels of anxiety, mild depressed moods, moderate behavioral / disciplinary problems at the troop and an overall inability to adopt to military life. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 2 March 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 March 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 March 2014 / 3 years, 18 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / HS Graduate / 86 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 19D10, Cavalry Scout / 2 years, 1 day d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summarized Article 15, dated 11 October 2015, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (10 July 2015); he was disrespectful in deportment toward SGT X., a noncommissioned officer, who was then in the execution of his office, by walking away from him while he was talking to him (applicant, 23 July 2015); having knowledge of a lawful order issued by SGT X., not to use mobile devices during CLS class, an order which it was his duty to obey, did, fail to obey the same by wrongfully using his mobile device (12 August 2015); and having knowledge of a lawful order issued by SGT X., to put his phone away, an order which it was his duty to obey, did, fail to obey the same by using his mobile device in CLS class (24 August 2015); extra duty for 14 days. Report of Mental Health Evaluation, dated 19 January 2016, relates the applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI and both screens were negative. SM was referred for psychological testing several months ago to rule out certain behavioral Issues and possible psychiatric conditions, however, he refused to comply with testing stating he did not think it was necessary. His problems appear to occur in response to occupational and environmental stressors, feeling he does not belong in the military and these symptoms are not likely to improve as long as he remains in the Army. His continued maladjustment Issues, poor decision making and behavioral problems render him unfit for duty, it was recommended he be separated due to difficulty adjusting to the Army under a Chapter 5-17 separation. The applicant received a negative counseling statement for several acts of misconduct; and also for being flagged. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); and a trial defense services legal memorandum. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-17 specifically provides that a Soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty and requires that the diagnosis be so severe that the Soldier's ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired. AR 635-200, paragraph 5-1, states a Soldier being separated under this paragraph will be awarded a characterization of service of honorable, under honorable conditions, or an uncharacterized description of service if in entry-level status. A general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions and an honorable discharge (HD) is rarely ever granted. An HD may be given only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty. A general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally inappropriate for individuals separated under the provisions of Chapter 5-17 unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service which warrant such characterization. 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 document submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-1b, states no Soldier will be awarded a character of service of general, under honorable conditions under this Chapter unless the Soldier is notified of the specific factors in his service record which warrants such a characterization, using the notification procedure. The record indicates the applicant was not notified of any specific factors which would warrant a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service. The discharge was not consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was not within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was not provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 17 August 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 AR20170010893 1