1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 September 2018 b. Date Received: 19 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 effect, enlisted in the Army on 23 May 2007 and considered oneself to be an upstanding Soldier prior to a deployment to Iraq. The applicant did not have any UCMJ action prior to the deployment. Upon returning from Iraq in 2010, the applicant had a difficult time readjusting and was later diagnosed with PTSD. The applicant's marriage began to fall apart and felt there was no support system. The applicant started to use alcohol to cope with the difficulties and deeply regrets the decision. It was an honor to be able to serve the country and that decision took it away. Since discharge, the applicant has received the necessary help through the VA. The applicant has since divorced and remarried to a wonderful woman. The applicant has attended college and graduated with a Bachelor's Degree in Criminal Justice and is currently looking for new career opportunities. The applicant has grown and learned from the mistake and had served the country honorably. With an honorable discharge, new opportunities would be opened. 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 the applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Abuse, Depressive Disorder NOS, and Anxiety Disorder NOS. The applicant is 30% service-connected for PTSD through the VA. In summary, although the applicant has a BH diagnoses, it is only partially mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 23 January 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: 1 February 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 9 December 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: being arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol (8 October 2011) and assaulting his wife x 2 (25 April 2009 and 14 January 2011) (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 December 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 January 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 November 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 4 years, 8 months, 9 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 23 May 2007 to 3 November 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (11 October 2009 to 21 September 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 20 May 2009, for assault on his wife on 25 April 2009. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of $784 pay per month for one month (suspended), and extra duty and restriction for 45 days (suspended). CG Article 15, dated 22 February 2011, for assault on his wife 14 January 2011. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $455 pay per month for one month (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 14 days (suspended), and oral reprimand. General Officer Letter of Reprimand, dated 24 October 2011, showing the applicant was reprimanded for being apprehended by Fort Benning Military Police for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol with a .189 breath alcohol content. FG Article 15, dated 17 November 2011, for disobeying a lawful order issued by a noncommissioned officer on 8 October 2011 and driving under the influence of alcohol on 8 October 2011 with a BAC equal to or exceeding .08. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $733 pay per month for two months (suspended), and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Military Police Report, dated 25 April 2009, for spouse abuse and assault consummated by battery. Military Police Report, dated 14 January 2011, show the applicant was the subject of investigation for spouse abuse-civilian female victim (2nd offense) and assault consummated by battery. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 2 November 2011, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis 1 for adjustment disorder with depressed mood and anxiety. It was noted that he had been enrolled in ASAP since October 2011 and was currently attending appointments. The applicant was mentally responsible and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings. He was screened for PTSD and MTBI. Neither were evident. The applicant appeared to be experiencing an adjustment disorder for which he was receiving BH treatment. The condition did not warrant disposition through military medical channels. The applicant was appropriated for administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. The Report of Medical History (DD Form 2807-1) completed by the applicant on 22 November 2011, shows that the applicant made comments about having issues with anxiety and that he was taking Effexor. The applicant submitted a document from the Department of Veterans Affairs showing he has been awarded 30 percent service connected disability for post-traumatic stress disorder (also claimed as anxiety and depression) 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; and a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs showing he has been awarded 30 percent service connected disability for post-traumatic stress disorder (also claimed as anxiety and depression) 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends that since his discharge he has attended college and graduated with his bachelor's degree in Criminal Justice. 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 he enlisted in the Army on 23 May 2007 and considered himself to be an upstanding Soldier prior to his deployment to Iraq. He did not have any UCMJ action against him prior to his deployment. When he returned from Iraq in 2010 he had a difficult time readjusting and was later diagnosed with PTSD. His marriage began to fall apart, and he felt that he had no support system. He started to use alcohol to cope with the difficulties that he was facing. He deeply regrets the decision he made, it was an honor to be able to serve his country and that decision took that away from him. Since his discharge he has received the help that he needed through the VA. He has since divorced and remarried to a wonderful woman. He has attended college and graduated with his bachelor's degree in Criminal Justice and is currently looking for new career opportunities. He has grown and learned from the mistake he made and feels that he served his country honorably and with an honorable discharge, new opportunities would be open for him. The applicant's contentions were noted; evidence in the record shows the applicant underwent a Mental Status Evaluation, on 2 November 2011, which shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis 1 for adjustment disorder with depressed mood and anxiety. It was noted that he had been enrolled in ASAP since October 2011 and was currently attending appointments. The applicant was mentally responsible and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings. He was screened for PTSD and MTBI. Neither were evident. The applicant appeared to be experiencing an adjustment disorder for which he was receiving BH treatment. The condition did not warrant disposition through military medical channels. The applicant was cleared for administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. The post-service documents submitted by the applicant from the Department of Veterans Affairs are noted. However, the fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. Also, the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. It should be noted; the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. The applicant's post-service accomplishments were noted and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishments. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to new career opportunities. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 23 January 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 AR20180015914 1