1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 January 2018 b. Date Received: 24 May 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he is requesting a change in discharge for his time in service (TIS) from 12 August 2007 to 3 May 2011. He takes full responsibility for his actions as he was at fault, and he failed to address his alcohol problem. He felt he was self-medicating for a more severe problem of PTSD. He was diagnosed by VA as having PTSD with alcohol abuse. He is not currently at a point of being recovered, but he continues trying to rid himself of the problems and educating on further prevention. The reason for his discharge was a one-time incident with no other incidents, professionally or personally. 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) there was a nexus between a behavioral health or medical condition and the some of the misconduct which led to the applicant's separation from the Army. The Applicant's post-service diagnosis of PTSD, Alcohol Dependence and mental status at the time of the misconduct mitigate the offenses of being drunk on duty and violating a General Order not to drink while in Iraq. PTSD does not mitigate the offenses of an NCO assaulting a junior, enlisted Soldier, assaulting a fellow NCO or assaulting a Military Police officer who was in the execution of his duties. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 October 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 3 May 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 March 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He wrongfully violated General Order No. 1A by possessing and consuming alcohol while deployed to Iraq. He was found drunk on duty. He unlawfully assaulted PFC X He unlawfully assaulted PFC X, who was in the execution of his Military Police duties. He unlawfully assaulted a fellow NCO, SGT X. He displayed drunk and disorderly behavior. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 March 2011 (date the applicant offered to plead guilty to all charges and its specifications in a summary court-martial) (5) Administrative Separation Board: Unconditionally waived, pursuant to an accepted offer to plead guilty in a summary court-martial. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 7 April 2011 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 March 2005 / 7 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 92G10, Food Service Operations Specialist / 7 years, 8 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (12 August 2003 to 28 February 2005) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 March 2004 to 18 March 2005), (4 October 2006 to 29 November 2007), (11 October 2008 to 27 September 2009), 7 November 2010 to 22 April 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3; AAM; AGCM-2; NDSM; ICM-4CS; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; NCOPDR; ASR; OSR-3; CAB; MUC g. Performance Ratings: Three NCOERs: 31 May 2008 thru 30 May 2009, Marginal 31 May 2009 thru 30 May 2010, Fully Capable 31 May 2010 thru 19 April 2011, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 7 February 2011, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for simple assault, aggravated assault, simple assault on a military law enforcer, resisting apprehension, harassing communication, drunk and disorderly, conduct unbecoming a member of the military service, failing to obey general order-standards of conduct, and using provoking speech/gestures and indecent language. Offer to Plead Guilty at a Summary Court-Martial, dated 10 March 2011, reflects that the applicant pleaded guilty to all charges and its specifications, and specifically, in pertinent part, agreed to an administrative separation and waive his right to an administrative separation board. The offer was accepted on 15 March 2011. Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial indicates that on 24 March 2011, the applicant was found guilty of the following charges that were preferred on 3 March 2011, and his sentence consisted of a reduction to E-5 and 60 days of restriction: Charge I: Violating of Article 92, UCMJ, for violating a lawful general order on 7 February 2011, by wrongfully possessing and consuming alcohol. Charge II: Violation of Article 112, UCMJ, for being found drunk while on duty as a senior first cook on 7 February 2011. Charge III: four specifications of violating Article 128, UCMJ, for assaulting four separate Soldiers on 7 February 2011, one Soldier who was executing his military police duties. Charge IV: Violation of Article 134, UCMJ, for being drunk and disorderly on 7 February 2011. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant's documentary evidence: VA decision letter, dated 19 September 2013, shows that he was assigned 70 percent for service-connected "Posttraumatic stress disorder with alcohol abuse." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 15 January 2018, and VA letter, dated 19 September 2013. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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 14-12c 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's available/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, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By the incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. 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 his misconduct was the result of the symptoms of his PTSD. A careful review of his contentions, the available record, and the applicant's documentary evidence indicate 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. 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 and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 12 October 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 AR20180007595 1