1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 May 2018 b. Date Received: 7 May 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his anxiety and depression hampered his ability to adapt to military life. His service records show a pattern of good conduct and honorable service. His Military Occupation Specialty (MOS) is annotated incorrectly on his DD Form 214. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of ADHD; Adjustment Disorder with anxiety and depressed mood; Alcohol Abuse. The applicant is 60% service connected, 30% for Chronic Adjustment Disorder. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Alcohol Abuse. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 28 October 2020, 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: 25 December 2017 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 30 June 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he failed to report to place of duty on divers occasions between (7 June 2017 and 29 November 2017); he disobeyed a lawful order given to him by SSG A.M. (13 April 2017); and he failed to have a clean shaven face (3 January 2017). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 30 June 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 3 October 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 October 2013 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 years / HS Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 68A10, Biomedical Equipment Specialist / 4 years, 2 months, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated, 10 November 2016, for having received a lawful command from 2LT A.D., his superior commissioned officer, to quit horse playing and continue running at a higher speed, or words to that effect, did willfully disobey the same by saying, "I am waiting for my battle buddy," or words to that effect (19 September 2016); he was disrespectful in deportment toward SSG S.P., a noncommissioned officer, who was then in the execution of her office, by rolling his eyes and shaking his head at her (6 Oct5ober 2016); having received a lawful order from CPL J.M., a noncommissioned officer, to be at the company before he reported for staff duty, an order which it was his duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same (20 October 2016); having received a lawful order from SGT J.A., a noncommissioned officer, to be at the company once he was released from staff duty, an order which it was your duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same about 20 October 2016); and he knew of his duties, was derelict in the performance of those duties in that he willfully failed to complete the APFT in it's entirety by disqualifying himself from the run event, as it was his duty to do (6 October 2016); extra duty and restriction for 10 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 12 May 2017; relates there was no current evidence of mental disease or defect of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through medical channels. He was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish between right and wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate intelligently in any proceedings deemed appropriate by Command. This evaluation was neither capable or intended to detect the predilection towards future behavioral health issues, sexual violence, or other unethical or illegal conduct. These conclusions were made solely on the existence of his behavioral health status at the time of this evaluation. The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 31 May 2017, revealed that the applicant was being seen at Embedded Behavioral Health for ADHD, anxiety and depression. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (two pages). 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 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. 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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service and the issues submitted with his applications were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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 documented pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 seeks relief contending, his anxiety and depression hampered his ability to adapt to the military life. The record of evidence shows the applicant was being seen at Embedded Behavioral Health for ADHD, anxiety and depression. Further, there is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that anxiety and depression hampered his ability to adapt to the military life. The applicant also contends, his service records show a pattern of good conduct and honorable service. 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. The applicant additionally contends, his MOS is annotated incorrectly on his DD Form 214. The applicant's requested change to the DD Form 214 does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 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 28 October 2020, 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 / 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 AR20180006941 3