1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 October 2018 b. Date Received: 11 October 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, issues of PTSD was signified in the military records constantly, in wartime overseas, and also on US grounds during service. Records show how PTSD affected the applicant's social lifestyle with other comrades and leaders in the platoon on and off the military campus. 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 Acute PTSD, Adjustment Disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, Depression, and Mood Disorder. The applicant is 100% service-connected; 70% for PTSD and 70% for mTBI from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Psychosis NOS and Cannabis Dependence. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is partially mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 July 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, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post- service diagnoses 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: 16 April 2012 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 February 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; on 5 October 2011, he received a FG Article 15 for underage drinking and assault; on 26 March 2011, he received a CG Article 15 for missing movement, failing to report, and disrespecting a non-commissioned officer; and he also received numerous negative counseling statements. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant's election of rights is not contained in the available record and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 February 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 June 2009 / 3 years, 34 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 years / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 35M10, Human Intelligence Collector / 2 years, 10 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 27 July 2010 to 25 July 2011 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CAB, MUC g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 26 March 2011, for missing movement, failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (23 November 2010); and disrespect in language towards a noncommissioned officer (29 August 2010), reduction to PV2 / E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of $404 pay for one month. FG Article 15, dated 5 October 2011, for underage drinking (31 July 2011); and assaulting a noncommissioned officer by punching him in the face with a closed fist (31 July 2011); reduction to PV2 / E-2; forfeiture of $822 pay for two months (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days. 26 October 2011, the suspension of punishment of forfeiture of $822 pay for two months was vacated for the new offense of breaking restriction (6 October 2011). 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 Assessment, dated 11 January 2012, relates the applicant he was diagnosed with insomnia, anxiety and depression. Report of Medical Examination, dated, 17 January 2012, revealed the applicant was diagnosed with insomnia, anxiety and depression. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 19 January 2012, indicates the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of occupational problem. He was screened for PTSD and mTBI, these conditions were either not present or, if present, did not meet AR 40-501 criteria for a medical evaluation board. There was no current evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through military medical channels. The applicant was mentally responsible, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate intelligently as a respondent in any administrative proceedings. He was psychologically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the separation authority (GCMCA). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (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, the issues and document 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, issues of PTSD was signified in his military records constantly, in wartime overseas; also on US grounds during service; and records show how PTSD affected his social lifestyle with other comrades and leaders in his platoon on and off military campus. The evidence of record shows the applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI. Further, the record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition resulting from PTSD. 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 26 July 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, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in- service and post-service diagnoses 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. 10. 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 AR20180014842 1