1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 11 July 2018 b. Date Received: 17 July 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, the chain of command did not consider behavioral health issues. Since discharge, the applicant has been diagnosed with PTSD, which caused the applicant to exhibit uncharacteristic behavior that ultimately led to discharge for a single act of misconduct. The applicant's current discharge has caused substantial harm and is unable to qualify for employment. However, the applicant has been employed with a bank. The applicant has completed 93 percent of a MBA degree with a university and has started a consulting business. The applicant regrets the enlistment and believes was perpetrated by mental illness. 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 the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder and Acculturation Difficulty. While the applicant has a diagnosis of PTSD, this diagnosis relates to a traumatic event which occurred prior to entry into the Army. Based on the available information, there are no mitigating Behavioral Health conditions that are mitigating for the misconduct with led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 December 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was improper. Therefore, the characterization not being proper and equitable, the Board granted relief in the form of an upgrade of the applicant's 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 10 March 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 February 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He failed to obey a commissioned officer. He failed to participate in training, as it was his duty to do so. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 7 February 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 13 February 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 August 2016 / 3 years, 34 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / Bachelor's Degree / 124 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / None / 6 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for disrespecting a superior commissioned officer; willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer; being insubordinate towards a superior commissioned officer; failing to obey an order or regulation; and being considered for an involuntary separation. FG Article 15, dated 7 December 2016, for disobeying his superior commissioned officer on 8 November 2016, and being derelict in the performance of his duties on 7 November 2016. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $783 (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction (both suspended), and an oral reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 6 January 2017, indicates the applicant noted behavioral health issues. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 18 January 2017, indicates an "AXIS I" diagnosis of "Adjustment Disorder, Unspecified." The report further indicates that it was "determined that the elevation of his PTSD screening instrument (PCL-5=58) reflected pre-service trauma exposure related to his personal discovery of a family member deceased by suicide and that his presenting symptoms reflected depressed and anxious mood related to his desire to leave the Army." He was psychiatrically cleared for administrative separation according to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12 or other administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 11 July 2018; DD Form 214; individual sick slip, dated 2 November 2016; Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 18 January 2017; discharge orders; Report of Medical Assessment, dated 18 January 2017; and medical record, dated June 2017. 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 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, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's policies. 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 a diagnosis of PTSD, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health or post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms existed, and the applicant contends such were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. Based on the available evidence and if the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues existed and they 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 applicant contends his current discharge has caused him substantial harm as he is unable to qualify for employment due to his current discharge. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The record further confirms the applicant was in entry level status (ELS) at the time the unit commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct (serious offense). A Soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty. The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the Soldier with a probationary period. Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier's service will be uncharacterized when the separation is initiated while the Soldier is in entry level status. Furthermore, for Soldiers in entry-level status, an honorable discharge may be granted only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty. No such unusual circumstances were present in the applicant's record and his service did not warrant an honorable characterization. According to AR 635-200, paragraphs 3-9a(3) and 14-3c and d, as provides for Soldiers who enlisted in the RA and who is in entry-level status, who have not been awarded an MOS, service will be described as uncharacterized under the aforementioned provisions. The record reflects the applicant was in an entry level status, until 11 February 2017-he was notified of the initiation of his separation proceedings on 7 February 2017 (within the 180-day period) while he was still in training and had not received his MOS. Thus the uncharacterized description of service would accurately reflect the applicant's overall record of service because he was in an entry level status (ELS) on the date of the initiation of his separation action. An uncharacterized discharge is neither positive nor negative and it is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means that the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. The discharge was not consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was not within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was not provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 December 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was improper. Therefore, the characterization not being proper and equitable, the Board granted relief in the form of an upgrade of the applicant's 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 AR20180012391 1