1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 October 2017 b. Date Received: 27 October 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 effect, an upgrade would allow his education benefits to be re-instated and would improve his life. While stationed in Korea, he sustained a hip injury performing duties related to his MOS. After he was transferred to Fort Benning and worsening hip pain, he was diagnosed with a hip labral tear resulting from the injury in Korea. He states, after several months of physical therapy, he was counseled by medical staff regarding a medical discharge from the Army after only two years of service. He fell into a depression over the potential outcome and began abusing alcohol, which led to a DUI arrest by the Military Police and separation from the Army. After his discharge, he states, he returned home and sought help from his family and with their help, he was able to stop abusing alcohol. He made a choice to improve his life and received a service-connected disability through the VA for his injury. Early in 2017, he attended a driver's risk education course to reinstate his driving privileges, which he lost because of the DUI charge. Currently, he attends counseling through the VA and he has recently began living with his older brother and his family, using them as a positive influence and role model for how he wants to live his life. He states, as a combat veteran, his brother understands things about the Army that other people do not. His brother counsels him like a leader and cares for him like a battle buddy. His brother works as a full-time police officer, which inspires the applicant to be the best, so that he does not embarrass his brother or himself. He desires to continue to follow in his brother's footsteps, as he has done in the past and pursue a career in law enforcement. The applicant plans to use his knowledge and experiences, both good and bad, to help others. He states, a college education is the next logical step in his progress forward and why he is requesting an upgrade to an honorable discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV) the applicant may have had mitigating behavioral health conditions at the time that led to the applicant's discharge. There was likely a nexus between the applicant's diagnosis of Major Depression and Anxiety and his DUIs. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 17 October 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, post-service accomplishments and in-service and post-service diagnosis of behavioral health issues. 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 9 February 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 January 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 21 November 2015, you wrongfully operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol with a breath alcohol content of 0.137. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 January 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 22 January 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 30 December 2013 / 3 years, 18 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / Some College / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 2 years, 1 month, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 8 December 2015, for driving while under the influence of alcohol. On 2 November 2015, a Military Police Officer apprehended the applicant for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. The officer responded to a vehicle, accident call which he was a part of. The applicant was doing "doughnuts" in his vehicle, lost control of his vehicle and then struck a tree head on. The officer noticed the applicant smelled of alcohol. The officer administered standard field sobriety tests, which indicated that he was intoxicated. A breathalyzer test resulted in a reading of 0.133 grams per 210 liters breath alcohol content, exceeding the legal limit of .08g/210L. He was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 9 December 2015, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his VA medical records, dated disability rating decision, dated 10 April 2017, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with: alcohol dependence; and, depression. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; DD Form 214; medical treatment records; Form 1095-B. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he was able to stop abusing alcohol and attended a driver's risk education course to reinstate his driving privileges. 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 contends that medical issues contributed to his discharge from the Army. However, the service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, 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. The applicant provided a copy of his Veterans Administration treatment records, which reflects he was diagnosed with Alcohol dependence and 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 record shows that on 9 December 2015, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does 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 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 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 17 October 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, post-service accomplishments and in-service and post-service diagnosis of behavioral health issues. 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 AR20180000045 1