1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 17 August 2018 b. Date Received: 4 September 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 effect, would like an upgrade of discharge for the purpose of being able to start college. The applicant contends that the discharge was the result of life becoming very unstable. The applicant was dealing with the discovery of the wife's infidelity and soon after the death of an unborn child. The depression the applicant was in, went untreated, and began to disrupt other functions of life, including a sleeping disorder that the applicant is still receiving treatment for now. This disorder caused the applicant to be late to PT on many occasions, without treating the depression, the applicant was unable to overcome this disorder. The remainder of the applicant's military record was impeccable. The applicant was an exemplary Soldier and received an Army Achievement Medal for outstanding service. The applicant was also respected amongst peers and officers above. 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 post-service diagnoses of Insomnia and Anxiety Disorder from the VA. The applicant does not currently have a service-connected rating from the VA. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 July 2019, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 21 June 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 May 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on numerous times; Violation of the barrack's SOP on multiple occasion by smoking and allowing an unauthorized person to live in his room; Lying to noncommissioned and commissioned officers regarding payment of his travel card, his reason for being late to formation, and his noncompliance with the plan of action in a counseling statement; Violating multiple order including no contact orders and order to meet grooming standards; Engaging in underage drinking; and Being found to be incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties, due to previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor or alcohol. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 14 May 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 5 June 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 June 2011 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25F1P, Network Switching Systems Operator Maintainer / 2 years, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summarized Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 6 December 2012, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 8 November 2012, 21 November 2012, and 28 November 2012, and with intent to deceive, made to SFC G.W. and SSG J.C., an official statement, to wit: he was at the hospital with his wife all night, which statements was totally false on 28 November 2012. The punishment consisted of 7 days extra duty. CG Article 15, dated 27 February 2013, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty 4 February 2013, 12 February 2013, and 20 February 2013, and with intent to deceive made to SFC G.W., an official statement, to wit: he had completed his four page assigned essay and it was on his computer which statement was totally false on 20 February 2013. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $396 pay (suspended), and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 April 2013, which states the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and appreciated the difference between right and wrong. It was noted that a psychological examination was conduct, a clinical interview, mental status evaluation, and review of medical history was conducted. The applicant's had history of domestic violence onto him where he was designated victim. The nature of his relationship may have contributed to the repeated tardiness and evasiveness exhibited by the applicant. His spouse was incarcerated at the time for the reported violence. However, in response to command influence and expression of concern for his welfare, he had remained insubordinate, been untruthful, and exercised poor judgment. In brief there was no evidence of a psychiatric disease or defect which would exonerate the applicant from responsibility for those matters which were the basis for command seeking administrative action. He was cleared for administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. Several negative counseling statements for various actions of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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 his general (under honorable conditions) discharge 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. 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 that his discharge was the result of his life becoming very unstable. He was dealing with the discovery of his wife's infidelity and soon after the death of his unborn child. The depression he was in went untreated and began to disrupt other functions of his life including a sleeping disorder that he is still receiving treatment for now. His disorder caused him to be late to PT on many occasions, without treating his depression he was unable to overcome his disorder. The remainder of his military record was impeccable. He was an exemplary Soldier and received an Army Achievement Medal for outstanding service. He was also respected among his peers and officers above. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishment. However, as noted in the Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 April 2013, which states the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and appreciated the difference between right and wrong. It was noted that he had a history of domestic violence onto him where he was designated victim. The nature of his relationship may have contributed to the repeated tardiness and evasiveness exhibited by the applicant. His spouse was incarcerated at the time for the reported violence. However, in response to command influence and expression of concern for his welfare, he had remained insubordinate, been untruthful, and exercised poor judgment. In brief there was no evidence of a psychiatric disease or defect which would exonerate the applicant from responsibility for those matters which were the basis for command seeking administrative action. He was cleared for administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. It should be noted; by regulation, an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of pattern of misconduct. It appears the applicant's generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to start college. However, 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 July 2019, 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 AR20180015026 1