1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 June 2017 b. Date Received: 18 July 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, has served the country and tried to be the best Soldier that the applicant could possibly be. The applicant states, there was an injustice because the Army did not help. The Army wanted the applicant to hide the pain and only wanted to treat what could be seen, which was alcohol abuse. The Army did not prepare the applicant for the death of friends and how the loss would cause the applicant not to function. The applicant's discharge should be upgraded because of serving two combat tours. The first tour was successful and the applicant returned broken, but functioning. After the second tour, the applicant was broken and could not function. The applicant needs help and does not want to be tossed aside. The applicant was unprepared for the toll that combat and the loss of friends and fellow Soldiers would have. The trauma the applicant witnessed and endured caused Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Initially, the applicant did not understand why the applicant was unable to cope and tried to hide the inability to cope with alcohol. The PTSD led to medicate these feelings and nightmares with alcohol. The applicant sought help for the abuse of alcohol because the applicant focused on the problem that could be seen and not the things that were going on under the surface. The Army gave the applicant purpose and direction, but war and the loss of men that were a family, caused the applicant to lose way and began to self-destruct. 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 PTSD, Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety, Alcohol Dependence, Alcohol Abuse, Depressed Mood, Partner Relational Problem, and Borderline traits. The applicant is 50% service-connected for PTSD from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Major Depressive Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Substance Induced Mood Disorder. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 May 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post- service diagnoses of PTSD and OBH), and a prior period of honorable service. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (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: 8 May 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 March 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 7 January 2013, he drove a vehicle while impaired, with a BAC of .22 percent, on Fort Bragg, North Carolina. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 April 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 12 April 2013, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 April 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 February 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / HS Graduate / 113 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 88N2P, Transportation Management Coordinator / 11 years, 9 months, 26 days / The applicant's DD Form 214, Block 12d, Total Prior Active Service, erroneously reflects the applicant had no prior active service. The applicant's service record reflects he served 3 years, 4 months and 7 days of prior active duty service. d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 14 October 1987 - 20 February 1991 / GD (Break in Service) ARNG, 20 November 2004 - 7 March 2006 / HD RA, 8 March 2006 - 12 November 2007 / HD RA, 13 November 2007 - 26 February 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Afghanistan (22 January 2007 - 17 April 2008 / 28 August 2009 - 28 August 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-3, VUA, AGCM-2, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, HSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-3, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: 1 April 2010 - 31 March 2011 / Fully Capable 5 October 2011 - 4 October 2012 / Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 8 May 2012, for wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or drugs, incapacitated for the proper of performance of his duties (2 April 2012). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-5; and, forfeiture of $1,497 pay per month for two months (suspended). General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 29 January 2013, for being arrested in Fayetteville, North Carolina, for driving while impaired after he was found passed out behind the steering wheel of his vehicle in the roadway on Raeford Road, on 7 January 2013. Upon approach of the vehicle, the arresting officer detected an odor of alcohol emitting from his person. He was administered an intoximeter, which determined his BAC to be .22 percent, which was over the legal limit authorized to operate a motor vehicle in the State of North Carolina. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided copies of his active duty medical treatment records, which reflect he was treated for: Alcohol Dependence; Anxiety Disorder; Chronic PTSD; Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct; Major Depression; and, Dysthymic Disorder (Depressive Neurosis). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; DD Form 214; letter of support. 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 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 been retained on Active Duty. The applicant's provided documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service depression; 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 applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The applicant contends his command did not want to help him. 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. The applicant contends that he had good service which included two combat tours. 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. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The third party statement provided with the application spoke highly of the applicant's performance. However, the person providing the character reference statement was not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, the statement did not provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 8 May 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and OBH), and a prior period of honorable service. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20170014867 1