1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 August 2017 b. Date Received: 10 August 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he desires the upgrade based on his diagnosis of Chronic PTSD. He was undergoing weekly psychiatric counseling and a regular drug treatment program for his PTSD. His superiors claimed to have no knowledge of his condition or his profile. He states, when he tried explaining to his superiors what was happening with him, he was informed he would be redeploying no matter what. He tried to explain again in further detail, but as a result, he was given extra duty and sent out to the field. He knew he had no place being there and he states, it was at this point that he basically had the fight or flight mentality, and chose the flight way out. He believed he would never get the help he desperately needed. Currently, he still has many problems and needs an upgrade in order to be eligible to receive medical benefits. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, there was a nexus between a behavioral health medical condition and the misconduct, which led to the applicant's separation from the Army. The Applicant's post-service diagnosis of PTSD and mental status at the time of the misconduct mitigate the misconduct. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 January 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service and a post-service diagnosis of PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635- 200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 31 July 2006 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 7 June 2006, the applicant was charged with violating Article 85, UCMJ, for: on or about 5 May 2005, without authority and with intent to shirk important service, namely: deployment to the Joint Readiness Training Center and Iraq (OIF), quit his unit, to wit: Company 8, 1st Battalion, 34th Armor, located at Fort Riley, Kansas, and did remain so absent in desertion until on or about 25 April 2006. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 18 July 2006 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 25 July 2006 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 January 2003 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 93 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19K10, M1 Armor Crewman / 2 years, 6 months, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (10 September 2003 - 20 September 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge sheet as described in previous paragraph 3c. Four Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 5 May 2005; From "AWOL" to "Dropped From Rolls (DFR)," effective 5 June 2005; From "DFR" to "PDY," effective 25 April 2006; and, From "Deserter" to "PDY," effective 25 April 2006. Checklist For Pretrial Confinement, dated 15 June 2006, reflects, the applicant had been AWOL three times. On 3 May 2005, the applicant received a FG Article 15 for AWOL, disrespect to a senior noncommissioned officer and failure to repair. Two days after receiving his Article 15, the applicant deserted for nearly a year. He returned on 25 April 2006, when he knew his unit was no longer deploying. On 10 June 2006, three days after he was notified that UCMJ action was pending, he went AWOL again. There was probable cause to believe that the applicant did not care about his duties to the Army and would not hesitate to go AWOL again. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 355 days (AWOL, 5 May 2005 - 25 April 2006) / Apprehended by Civil Authorities j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Physical Profile, dated 15 April 2005, reflects the applicant had the following medical condition: PTSD, Chronic. The applicant provided a copy of his VA medical records and treatment summary, dated 8 December 2017, which reflects the applicant had been diagnosed on 17 September 2017, with PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application; a copy of his VA treatment records; and, four character statements. 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 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service PTSD. The applicant provided several character statements, which attest to the applicant's behavior post-service. 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 that an upgrade of his discharge would allow medical benefits. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include medical 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 24 January 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service and a post- service diagnosis of PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. 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: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change f. 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 AR20170016165 1