1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 November 2018 b. Date Received: 23 November 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, was diagnosed with PTSD on 29 May 2013, with a disability rating of 90 percent disability. The discharge proceedings never took into account the applicant's mental disabilities. 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, Alcohol Dependence and Anxiety Disorder NOS. Review of the applicant's VA record indicates a 90% service-connected rating; 70% for Chronic Adjustment Disorder. VA medical records diagnose the applicant with combat associated PTSD. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that was mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 February 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the 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: Unacceptable Conduct / AR 600-8-24, Paragraphs 4-2b and 4-24a(1) / BNC / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 29 May 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 5 July 2012 and 20 January 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 16 June 2010, he received a GOMOR for substantiated derogatory activity, which was filed in his OMPF. On 29 November 2012, he received a GOMOR for substantiated derogatory activity, which was filed in his OMPF. Conduct unbecoming an officer as indicated by the GOMOR. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 13 March 2013, with conditional waiver of BOI, resignation in lieu of elimination proceedings, contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) (5) DA Ad Hoc Review Board Recommendation: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 May 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period / Type of Service: 3 August 2000 / OCS Appointment (ADSO Information NIF) b. Age at Current Service / Education / GT Score: 26 / Master of Science, Administration / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-4 / 90A, 3H Logistics / 15 years, 4 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (14 January 1998 to 2 August 2000) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii; Korea, SWA / Kuwait (23 March 2003 to 2 June 2003), (10 April 2005 to 11 August 2005), (5 December 2005 to 5 April 2006), Afghanistan (15 January 2007 to 26 January 2008), (3 May 2011 to 12 March 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: DMSM; MSM-2; ARCOM-2; AAM-4; AGCM; NDSM; ACM- 3CS; ICM-2CS; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; KDSM; NCOPDR; ASR; OSR-5; NATO MDL g. Performance Ratings: Five OERs rendered at the rank of Major/O-4, as follows: 25 April 2009 thru 24 April 2010, Outstanding Performance, Must Promote 25 April 2010 thru 10 December 2010, Outstanding Performance, Must Promote 11 December 2010 thru 10 December 2011, Satisfactory Performance, Promote 11 December 2011 thru 15 May 2012, Satisfactory Performance, Promote 16 May 2012 thru 17 September 2012, Outstanding Performance, Must Promote h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report with its associated documents, dated 16 May 2010, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for simple assault. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 10 June 2010, indicates the applicant was reprimanded for driving while under the influence of alcohol. District Court document entitled, Misdemeanor Complaint, filed on 4 November 2012, with its associated documents, indicate the applicant was charged with two counts: Count 1 for driving while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, intoxicating liquor, inhalant, or any controlled substance; and Count 2 for refusal to submit to a chemical test. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 29 November 2012, indicates the applicant was reprimanded for driving while under the influence of alcohol on 4 November 2012. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant's documentary evidence: VA, Staff Psychiatrist letter, dated 4 May 2017, indicates the applicant met "DSM-V criteria for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder," and that his" psychiatric condition causes total impairment in his occupational and social functioning with deficiencies in all areas of his life." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 19 November 2018; DD Form 214; VA letter, dated 2 November 2018; and Staff Psychiatrist letter, dated 4 May 2017. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-24, Officer Transfers and Discharges, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security. 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 "BNC" as the appropriate code to assign Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraphs 4-2b and 4-24a(1), unacceptable conduct, pursuant to resignation or voluntary discharge in lieu of elimination proceedings. 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 his discharge, based on unacceptable conduct, 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 Army officers. It brought discredit on the Army and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant provided no corroborating evidence demonstrating that the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence showing his service mitigated the unacceptable conduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues which involved being diagnosed with PTSD and prior to his discharge, his medical condition was never taking into account, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues along with notable service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues 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 record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 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 6 February 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the 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 AR20180015868 1