1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 November 2017 b. Date Received: 27 November 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 pertinent part and in effect, his battle with PTSD was recognized shortly after he returned from deployment due to combating hostile forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. His undiagnosed mental health combined with an extreme alcohol abuse, played a major role in the characterization of his discharge. Since his discharge, he completed three college degrees, two associates in technology and a Bachelor's Degree in power plants. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case files, AHLTA and JLV were reviewed. AHLTA files indicate applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Dependence, Anxiety, Traumatic Brain Injury (exposed to mortar attack in 2007 in Iraq which led to 30% hearing loss; also had hard parachute jump in Dec 2010), Concussion without LOC, Post-traumatic Headache. AHLTA also documents the presence of PTSD symptoms: insomnia, nightmares, intrusive recollections, hypervigilance, avoidant behaviors. Applicant underwent neuro-rehabilitation for his head injuries while on active duty. VA records indicate he is 70% service connected for PTSD. His total VA rating is 90%. Based on the available information, the applicant has a mitigating Behavioral Health disorder-PTSD. As PTSD is associated with the use of alcohol to self-medicate symptoms, there is a nexus between his PTSD and his offenses of drinking on duty. As PTSD is associated with avoidant behaviors, there is a nexus between his PTSD and the offenses of Failure to Report. As PTSD is associated with oppositionality and difficulty with authority figures, there is a nexus between PTSD and the offense of disobeying a lawful order. There is no nexus between PTSD and the offense of failing to report the use of alcohol by other soldiers. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 June 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, post-service accomplishments, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnosis of TBI and PTSD) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 6 July 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 February 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 13 July 2010, he was derelict in the performance of his duty by not reporting the consumption of alcohol by other Soldiers. On 4 July 2011, he disobeyed a lawful command. On 4 July 2011, he was drunk on duty. On 24 June 2011, he failed to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 March 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: 19 March 2012, conditionally waived contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 March 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 October 2006 / 6 years, 3 months (The applicant extended his enlistment by three months on 30 March 2011.) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 92F20, H7 Petroleum Supply Specialist / 7 years, 3 months, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (22 March 2005 to 13 October 2006) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (3 October 2006 to 15 December 2007), Afghanistan (1 April 2009 to 14 April 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AAM-4; AGCM-2; NDSM; ACM-2CS; ICM-CS; GWOTSM; NCOPDR; ASR; OSR-2; NATO MDL g. Performance Ratings: 1 December 2008 thru 30 November 2009, Among the Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: According to Commander's Report, dated 20 March 2012, the applicant received the following two FG Article 15s: The applicant received a FG Article on 7 September 2010, for dereliction of his duties. He was reduced to E-4, forfeiture of $1,099 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty. He received a FG Article 15 on 14 July 2011, for disobeying a lawful command and being drunk on duty. He was reduced to E-3, forfeiture of $975 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Discharge Orders i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant's documentary evidence: VA Rating Decision letter, dated 31 October 2016, indicates the applicant received an evaluation for PTSD with residuals of TBI service-connected disability at 70 percent. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 14 November 2017, with a self-authored statement; DD Form 214; Secretary of Defense Memorandum, dated 25 August 2017; and VA Rating Decision letter, dated 31 October 2016. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Since his discharge, he completed three college degrees, two associates in technology and a Bachelor's Degree in power plants. 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 available record of service, and 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. By the incidents of misconduct, the applicant compromised the special trust and confidence placed in a Soldier, and knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge. 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. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, and his post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his complete period of service and accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues which involved his battling with PTSD, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues along with notable service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. The applicant further contends that since his discharge, he completed three college degrees, two associates in technology and a Bachelor's Degree in power plants. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. 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 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 1 June 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, post-service accomplishments, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnosis of TBI and PTSD) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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 AR20170019735 6