1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 November 2018 b. Date Received: 3 December 2018 c. Previous Records Review: 11 May 2011, AR20100022302 (reconsideration based on current DOD guidance) d. 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, the discharge was related to suffering from an undiagnosed and untreated behavioral health condition, which included PTSD. 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 no content regarding the applicant. The applicant is 70% service-connected for PTSD through the VA. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with PTSD and Alcohol Use Disorder. In summary, the applicant had 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 15 March 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 29 March 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 February 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He was disrespectful to his superior noncommissioned officers. He disobeyed his noncommissioned officers. He made several false official statements. He was AWOL on two separate occasions, on 5 February 2002, and remained absent until 25 February 2002, and on 4 March 2002, and remained absent until 6 March 2002. He failed to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on several occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 18 February 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 March 2004 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 June 2001 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 42A10, SR Personnel / 2 years, 8 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (20 September 2002 to 10 August 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; ASR; PUC (A) g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 26 March 2002, for absenting himself from his unit without authority on 4 March 2002, and remained absent until 6 March 2002, and for absenting himself from his unit without authority on 5 February 2002, and remained absent until 25 February 2002. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $250, and 45 days of extra duty. Negative counseling statements for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; failing to act like a Soldier on and off duty; being arrested; being in jail; speeding and his license being suspended; making false official statements; being disrespectful towards an NCO; making provoking speeches or gestures; performance being substandard; attitude being nasty and unacceptable; using vulgar language; assaulting one of his one of his fellow Soldiers; being AWOL twice; failing to appear in court and having a bench warrant issued for his arrest; and bar to reenlistment being imposed. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 28 October 2003, indicates the application was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 22 days (AWOL on 5 February 2002 to 24 February 2002, for 20 days and on 4 March 2002 to 5 March 2002, for two days / applicant returned to military control j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant's documentary evidence: VA letter, dated 14 January 2019, indicates the applicant was assigned 70 percent evaluation for PTSD with alcohol abuse. Progress Notes indicate an impression of "AXIS I: PTSD, Chronic." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 28 November 2018. Additional Evidence: VA Rating Decision, dated 31 May 2018; VA letter, dated 14 January 2019; and Progress Notes, dated 9 April 2009, 9 January 2009, 23 July 2018, 31 August 2018, 26 February 2018, 20 September 2017, 14, 24 June 2017, 16 March 2018, 28 June 2010, 27 April 2010, and 29 October 2008. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 that 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 serious incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. 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's contentions regarding his discharge being related to suffering from an undiagnosed and untreated behavioral health condition, which included PTSD, 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 15 March 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 AR20180016743 1