1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 September 2018 b. Date Received: 10 September 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, was a great Soldier that was diagnosed with TBI, PTSD, back and knee injury; and was not performing well after deployment. The applicant is unable to get a job because of the disability. The applicant cannot attend college because of not being eligible for the post 9/11 G.I bill. The applicant has a family and is responsible for providing for them, but unfortunately cannot with these conditions. A prior records review was conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 February 2013. 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 an Alcohol Disorder. The applicant is 100% service-connected for PTSD from the VA. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with PTSD, Frontal Lobe and Executive Function Deficit, Concussion, and mTBI. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 March 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post- service diagnosis of PTSD and TBI). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (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: 12 January 2012 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 December 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he failed to report on diverse occasions between (7 January 2011 and 16 October 2011); he failed to obey lawful orders on diverse occasions between (27 January 2011 and 18 October 2011); and he violated a lawful general regulation (28 March 2011). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 5 December 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 December 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 April 2008 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 years / HS Graduate / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92A1P, Automated Logistical Specialist / 3 years, 8 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 8 December 2009 to 3 February 2010 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ACM-CS, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summarized Article 15, dated 4 November 2010, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x2 (15 October 2010 and 16 October 2010); and having knowledge of a lawful order issued by MAJ / O-4 E.C., which it was huis duty to obey, did fail to obey the same by failing to sign out on leave (18 October 2010); extra duty and restriction for 14 days. FG Article 15, dated 13 June 2011, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x3 (7 January 2011, 12 January 2011 and 25 March 2011); having received a lawful order from SFC / E-7 A.D. G., a noncommissioned officer, to provide documentation that his brother was residing with him, an order which it was your duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same (27 January 2011); having received a lawful order from SGT / E-5 J.E., a noncommissioned officer, to report back to work to sign his counseling statements, an order which it was his duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same (29 March 2011; and fail to obey a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully transporting his assigned military weapon in his privately owned vehicle (28 March 2011); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $733 pay for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 29 July 2011, relates the applicant could appreciate the difference between right and wrong, could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and met medical retention standards. The applicant was cleared from a Behavioral Health perspective for discharge. An administrative General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), 8 November 2011, for driving under the influence of alcohol. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 4 days, 9 January 2012 to 12 January 2012, returned to unit. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA medical document, dated 9 April 2015, relates the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD and TBI. VA progress notes, dated 17 October 2017, revealed that the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, severe symptoms and an unspecified depressive disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Two DD Forms 293 (four pages); change of address handwritten; letter, Director, Case Management Division; and VA medical documents (135 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, the issues and documents submitted with his application 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, he was a great Soldier that was diagnosed with TBI, PTSD, back and knee injury; and he was not performing well after his deployment. The applicant submitted VA documents that shows he was diagnosed with PTSD, severe symptoms, TBI and an unspecified depressive disorder. The applicant further contends, he is unable to get a job because of his disability; and he has a family that count on him to provide for them, but unfortunately he cannot with his conditions. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he is unable to get a job because of his disability. The applicant also contends, he cannot attend college because he is not eligible for the post 9/11 G.I bill. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): VA Medical Documents - 25 Pages b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 March 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD and TBI). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20180014153 5