1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 November 2017 b. Date Received: 13 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 effect, his discharge was the result of being told to cancel his psychology appointment that he was receiving treatment for because of his time in Afghanistan to go to the field. He contends that the statements against him were improperly entered into evidence and were inaccurate. There was only one witness, SSG H., others were not present. He contends he is 50 percent service connected disabled for PTSD and 10 percent for TBI as a result of being repeatedly blown up in Afghanistan. He contends his wife cheated on him while he was deployed to Afghanistan and they divorced in November of 2012. He was engaged in countless fire-fights while deployed that resulted in his best friend being killed right next to him. As a result of his discharge he was stripped of more than 30 days of leave because of the condition of the discharge, and ultimately was forced to declare bankruptcy. He was given the ARCOM for his actions in a war zone and presented with an AAM which his records does not reflect. He went up for selection to Special Forces, and he completed training for Ranger School, and finished 1st among enlisted members, and 3rd overall. He believes he was a good Soldier, all he was asking for was some time to process the traumatic events that had taken place, taking advantage of services provided through the military that they were all told to do. Instead and was called a bitch by someone in authority, and nearly court-martialed. His service was honorable, the only thing un-honorable were the conditions that he was forced to endure at the hands of those who were assigned to ensure that everyone in their command was properly taken care of. He contends he was a correctional officer for the state of Wisconsin from August 2014 until September of 2016. He has been attending Marquette University since September of 2015 and had made the Dean's list, and currently has an overall GPA of 3.2. He has never been in any trouble since his separation. He supports his two sons, and is present in their life. He is asking that the board look favorably upon his petition, and grant him the honorable discharge he believes he deserves. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. While applicant has been diagnosed with PTSD, it is the opinion of the ARBA psychiatrist that the behaviors he exhibited after deployment which resulted in his discharge were more likely than not due to his underlying Antisocial Personality Disorder and less likely than not due to his post- service diagnosis of PTSD. As such they are not mitigated by his post service diagnosis of PTSD. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 September 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 29 July 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 June 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates on 4 June 2013, the applicant was charged with the following charges: Being disrespectful in language toward SSG A.T.F., a noncommissioned officer, by saying to him, "I will not cancel my behavioral health appointments that' fucking bullshit you don't understand I have to see them and talk to them and don't make anymore? Yeah right I can see behavioral health you guys don't have the right to stop me! SGT F I'm on my way to work right now, "or words to that effect on 12 April 2013; Being disrespectful in language toward SSG J.M.H., a noncommissioned officer, by saying to him "Fucking mother fucker," Fucking bullshit," or words to that effect while leaving the Troop First Sergeant's office on 12 April 2013; Having knowledge of a lawful order issued by SSG J.M.H., to stop and go to parade rest, an order which was his duty to obey, failed to obey the same by wrongfully ignoring SSG J.M.H., by continuing to walk away from him on 12 April 2013; Wrongfully communicated to specialist M.F. and S.K., a threat to injury SSG H., by punching him if he counsels the applicant, and that said conduct was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces on 3 May 2013; and Being absent without authority from his unit from 3 May 2013 until his return on 21 May 2013. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 June 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 18 July 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 January 2011 / 6 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 6 months, 9 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (1 October 2011 to 13 July 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for acts of misconduct and performance i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL 17 days (4 May 2013 to 20 May 2013) / surrendered j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Chronological Record of Medical Care documents, dated 19 February 2013, 2 April 2013 and 11 June 2013 show the applicant had problems with cannabis dependence, adjustment disorder with depressed mood, adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, antisocial personality disorder; along with several other medical issues. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 11 June 2013, shows that the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I (303.90) for alcohol dependence, with physiological dependence and Axis II (301.7) antisocial personality disorder. It was noted that the applicant had been in treatment with ASAP and was recommended that he return to ASAP for additional treatment. It was also noted that the applicant had a personality disorder that result in the applicant being fit for duty but unsuitable. Nonetheless, the applicant was aware of his situation, understood the recommendations, and was able to participate in his defense. The applicant was cleared psychologically for administrative processing. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 in lieu of DD Form 293; several character statements from individuals he directly served with; and also a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated 22 July 2015, which makes reference to the applicant receiving 50 percent service connected disability for post-traumatic stress disorder. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends that since his discharge he has been a correctional officer for the state of Wisconsin from August 2014 until September of 2016. He has been attending Marquette University since September of 2015 and had made the Dean's list, and currently has an overall GPA of 3.2. He has never been in any trouble since his separation. He supports his two sons, and is present in their life. 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 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 evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of several 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 applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was the result of being told to cancel his psychology appointment that he was receiving treatment for because of his time in Afghanistan to go to the field. He contends that the statements against him were improperly entered into evidence and were inaccurate. There was only one witness, SSG H., others were not present. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. He had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant further contends he is 50 percent service connected disabled for PTSD and 10 percent for TBI as a result of being repeatedly blown up in Afghanistan. He contends his wife cheated on him while he was deployed to Afghanistan and they divorced in November of 2012. He was engaged in countless fire-fights while deployed that resulted in his best friend being killed right next to him. The applicant's contentions was noted; Chronological Record of Medical Care documents, dated 19 February 2013, 2 April 2013 and 11 June 2013 show the applicant had problems with cannabis dependence, adjustment disorder with depressed mood, adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, antisocial personality disorder; along with several other medical issues. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 11 June 2013, shows that the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I (303.90) for alcohol dependence, with physiological dependence and Axis II (301.7) antisocial personality disorder. It was noted that the applicant had been in treatment with ASAP and was recommended that he return to ASAP for additional treatment. It was also noted that the applicant had a personality disorder that result in the applicant being fit for duty but unsuitable. Nonetheless, the applicant was aware of his situation, understood the recommendations, and was able to participate in his defense. The applicant was cleared psychologically for administrative processing. The letter submitted by the applicant from the Department of Veterans Affairs was noted; however, the fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. The applicant contends as a result of his discharge he was stripped of more than 30 days of leave because of the condition of the discharge, and ultimately was forced to declare bankruptcy. He was given the ARCOM for his actions in a war zone and presented with an AAM which his records does not reflect. He went up for selection to Special Forces, and he completed training for Ranger School, and finished 1st among enlisted members, and 3rd overall. He believes he was a good Soldier, all he was asking for was some time to process the traumatic events that had taken place, taking advantage of services provided through the military that they were all told to do. Instead and was called a bitch by someone in authority, and nearly court-martialed. His service was honorable, the only thing un-honorable were the conditions that he was forced to endure at the hands of those who were assigned to ensure that everyone in their command was properly taken care of. 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 and the applicant is to be commended on his in-service accomplishments. It should be noted; 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. The applicant contends he had good service and deserves an honorable characterization. However, by regulation, a UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of in-lieu of trial by court-martial. It appears the applicant's generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge The applicant contends that since his discharge he has been a correctional officer for the state of Wisconsin from August 2014 until September of 2016. He has been attending Marquette University since September of 2015 and had made the Dean's list, and currently has an overall GPA of 3.2. He has never been in any trouble since his separation. He supports his two sons, and is present in their life. He is asking that the board look favorably upon his petition, and grant him the honorable discharge he believes he deserves. The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishment. 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 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 7 September 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 AR20180001149 1