1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 November 2017 b. Date Received: 26 December 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 current discharge is unjust because it is not a true reflection of his active duty service or his character. Prior to his deployment, he was the Soldier of the Month board runner-up. After his separation, he was fortunate to gain employment as a contractor in support of OEF, and used his analytical skills and traits effectively for two years by supporting ground forces with eliminating threats of IED on the battlefield and saving lives. However, when his contract ended, he became unemployed for eight months, but managed to engage in community service as a grant writer for a local nonprofit, where he served homeless persons suffering from mental illness-many were veterans. He realized then the unresolved issues with PTSD stemming from his first deployment. He sought help from VA where he learned that he started displaying the symptoms of PTSD during his OIF deployment, and being a 19-year-old in a war zone, he did not have adequate personal skills to deal with the stressors of war, which caused anger, aggressiveness, and rebellious behavior towards his leadership. He received two CG Article 15s during a single 15-month deployment. He had not received the proper aid or healthy coping skills with his PTSD, and upon returning to garrison environment, his PTSD symptoms manifested even further. The circumstances that led to his separation are most regrettable because he is passionate about being an Intelligence Analyst. So much that he sought career opportunities in the intelligence field; however, his current discharge is hindering him from being an asset to our country and it has disallowed him to further himself in the field that he has an exceptional skills, helping others and saving lives. Years after his discharge, he finally learned better ways to cope with his PTSD. An upgrade would enable him to obtain a college degree and use his Veterans' Preference when applying for Federal employment in the intelligence field, which would provide him the opportunity to continue serving his country. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant did not have a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. There was no evidence of a PTSD diagnosis. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 22 June 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (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: 10 August 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 July 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He disobeyed the orders of noncommissioned officers. He failed to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions. He disrespected noncommissioned officers on more than one occasions, in both language and deportment. He has been derelict in the performance of his duties. He was arrested in Austin for public intoxication. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 July 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 30 July 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 July 2006 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 35F10, Intelligence Analyst / 3 years, 1 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (5 November 2007 to 18 January 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; NDSM; ICM-CS; GWOTSM; AASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 6 August 2008, while in Iraq, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on five separate occasions on 18 June 2008, 31 May 2008, 11 April 2008, 10 April 2008, and 26 March 2008; being disrespectful in deportment towards an NCO on 31 May 2008; disobeying an NCO on 5 May 2008; being disrespectful in language and deportment towards an NCO on 5 May 2008; and being derelict in the performance of his duties on 18 April 2008. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of $352, and 14 days of extra duty. Record of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 12 August 2008, vacated the suspended punishment of a reduction to E-2, imposed on 6 August 2008, because the applicant failed to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on two separate occasions, on 7 and 8 August 2008. Negative counseling statements for not being at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; establishing a pattern of misconduct; disrespecting an NCO; failing to follow instructions on numerous occasions; leaving his place of duty without proper authority; failing to have his weapon cleaned and readied for inspection; being arrested for public intoxication; and implementing measures to prevent future misconduct. CG Article 15, dated 29 October 2008, while in Iraq, for disobeying an NCO on 11 October 2008. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $352, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), dated 25 November 2017, with self-authored statement; and DD Form 214; letter of support, dated 7 December 2017. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, after his discharge, he served two years as a contractor in support of OEF, followed by engaging in community service by working as a grant writer for a local nonprofit, where he serves homeless person suffering from mental illnesses, many whom are veterans. 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. He 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 having a lot of behavioral health issues during and after his deployments, and being diagnosed and treated for PTSD, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder or any behavioral health issues diagnoses and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any behavioral health condition and diagnoses. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., documentary evidence of behavioral health issues or PTSD diagnoses), for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The applicant has expressed his desire to have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill to enable him to obtain a college degree. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, eligibility for veterans' 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 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 22 June 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20180000360 1