1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 July 2018 b. Date Received: 17 December 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was due to PTSD and an addiction that was a key role in the pattern of misconduct after returning from Afghanistan. The applicant was a young Soldier who went through traumatic and life changing events. 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 BH diagnoses while on active duty. The applicant is 70% service-connected for PTSD from the VA. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 September 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and post-service accomplishments. Therefore, the board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 5 August 2009 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 12 June 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; without authority he failed to be at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (23 March 2009); he wrongfully previous overindulged in intoxicating liquor, he was incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties (23 March 2009); and without authority he went from his appointed place of duty (16 April 2008). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF, consulted with legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 July 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 February 2004 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 years / HS Graduate / 107 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 25B20, Information Systems Operator / Analyst / 5 years, 5 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan, 15 March 2006 to 11 June 2007 f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, KDSM, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL g. Performance Ratings: 1 January 2008 to 30 September 2008, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 30 March 2009, for without authority, going from his appointed place of duty (16 April 2008); forfeiture of $524 pay, extra duty for 14 days (suspended), and restriction for 14 days. FG Article 15, dated 30 March 2009, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (23 March 2009); as a result of wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties (23 March 2009); forfeiture of $1,167 pay for two months (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 29 May 2009, relates the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in any administrative proceedings. He was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA Rating Decision, dated 27 April 2018, revealed the applicant had a service connection for PTSD and was granted an evaluation of 70 percent disabling, effective 13 March 2018. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 214; VA Rating Decision (three pages); and a NCO Evaluation Report (two pages). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states in his application he is employed by the Veterans Affairs. 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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) 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. By the documented pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting 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, his discharge was due to PTSD and addiction, which was a key role in his pattern of misconduct after returning from Afghanistan. The applicant submitted a VA document that shows he had a service connection for PTSD and was granted an evaluation of 70 percent disabling, effective 13 March 2018. The applicant further contends, he was a young Soldier who went through traumatic and life changing events. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. 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 4 September 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and post-service accomplishments. Therefore, the board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20190001539 5