1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 October 2018 b. Date Received: 30 October 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, was diagnosed with mTBI. The applicant's PTSD gets bad at times and has to get away from everyone. 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 Adjustment Disorder with anxiety and depressed mood/with disturbance of emotions and conduct, Chronic PTSD, and Concussion, h/o TBI. VA records contain only DOD content. In summary, although the applicant has a BH diagnosis, it is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 6 June 2012 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 January 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; causing death of soon to be adopted 4 months old daughter. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 18 January 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: Applicant conditionally waived his right to appear before an administrative separation board; if the separation authority separates him with a character of service no worse than General (Under Honorable Conditions). On 6 March 2012, the separation authority denied the applicant's conditional waiver and referred the case to an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 22 May 2012 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 January 2008 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / HS Graduate / 87 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 11C10, Indirect Fire Infantryman / 3 years, 1 month, 24 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 1 January 2009 to 19 December 2009 f. Awards and Decorations: PH, NDSM, ACM-2 CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: It appears, CG Article 15, dated 20 August 2010, Article 86; reduction to PFC / E-3, forfeiture of $463 pay (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Article 15 is not contained in the available record. See unit commander's recommendation memorandum. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Confinement Civilian Authorities for 426 days, 25 March 2011 to 6 June 2012. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 22 June 2011, indicates that the applicant went the TBI program. Report of Medical Examination, dated 23 June 2011, relates the applicant was diagnosed with anxiety. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 22 November 2011, reveled the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood. He had a positive screen for mTBI. His screen for PTSD was negative. He was cleared for administrative separation. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 214; separation authority's documentation (two pages); Report of Medical History (three pages); Report of Medical Examination (one page); Report of Medical assessment (two pages); Report of Mental Status Evaluation (two pages); Community Mental Health Service, Commander's Evaluation; and Adirondack Physical Therapy documents (four 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 14-12c 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. 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 under other than honorable conditions to general (under honorable conditions). 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 misconduct (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general (under honorable conditions) or 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 diagnosed with mTBI. The record of evidence shows that the applicant went to the TBI program. The applicant further contends, his PTSD gets bad at time and he has to get away from everyone. The service 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. 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 3 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 AR20180015634 1