1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 16 June 2018 b. Date Received: 19 June 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, an upgrade of an enlistment of 10 February 2010, is justified due to VA diagnosis of "Anxiety Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood" on 31 August 2012, which progressed into "current diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder and PTSD" based on VA medical examination on 8 October 2014. The onset of this service-connected medical condition occurred during and after an Iraq deployment in 2009. 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, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Insomnia. A Mental Status Evaluation, dated 27 July 2011, indicated the applicant's primary diagnosis was an Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood. Post-service, the applicant has a service connected disability rating of 90%. The Veteran Affairs has diagnosed the applicant with PTSD, Major Depressive Disorder, an Anxiety Disorder, Impulse Control Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, ADHD, and Opioid Abuse. In summary, the applicant's behavioral health conditions are considered partially mitigating for the offenses which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 December 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 October 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 August 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 9 June 2011, he disrespected an NCO. On 9 June 2011 and 16 May 2011, he violated a lawful general regulation. On 16 May 2011, he disobeyed a commissioned officer. On 16 February 2011 and 3 March 2011, he failed to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 August 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 29 September 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (The GCMCA considered and disapproved the recommendation of the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) to refer the applicant's case to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 February 2010 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / GED / 113 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91H10, Track Vehicle Repairer / 3 years, 2 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (11 August 2008 to 9 February 2010) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (3 September 2009 to 21 November 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM; NDSM-2; ICM-CS; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings, dated 2 August 2011, with its associated medical records/documents. Negative counseling statements for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; not being able to operate his POV until his license is reinstated; driving on-post without a valid license; failing to follow instructions; failing to obey military protective order; being involved in a verbal domestic dispute; and being disrespectful towards an NCO. Summarized Article 15, dated 15 March 2011, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on two separate occasions on 11 March 2011, and 16 February 2011. The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty. CG Article 15, dated 1 June 2011, (cites two offenses that are illegible). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 (suspended) and 14 days of extra duty. FG Article 15, dated 25 July 2011, for being disrespectful in language towards an NCO on 9 June 2011, and wrongfully operating a vehicle without a valid license on 9 June 2011. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $822 pay per month (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Record of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 23 November 2011, vacated the suspended punishment of a reduction To E-3 imposed on 1 June 2011, due to being disrespectful in language towards and NCO on 9 June 2011, and driving without a valid license on 9 June 2011. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Memorandum, dated 1 July 2011, subject: Current Psychiatric Status of [the applicant], shows the examiner's opinion of current psychiatric statuses as "Generalized Anxiety Disorder" and "Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Predominant Inattentive Type." Report of Medical History, dated 4 March 2011, indicates the applicant noted behavioral health issues. The applicant's documentary evidence: Progress Notes, page 148, show an "AXIS I" diagnosis of "PTSD." VA Rating Decision, dated 20 October 2014, shows an evaluation for "bipolar disorder previously rated as anxiety disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood currently rated as 50 percent disabling, [was] confirmed and continued." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 13 August 2018; pages 3, 59, 65-67, 145-146, and 148 of Progress Notes; and VA Rating Decision, dated 20 October 2014. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant's documentary medical records indicate he has been attending school as a full-time student. 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. The applicant compromised the special trust and confidence placed in an NCO. By the serious 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's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues, including his PTSD diagnosis, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates 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. 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 7 December 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. 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 AR20180010418 1