1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 December 2018 b. Date Received: 28 January 2019 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, it is the applicant's personal goal to achieve an upgrade for a part of life that the applicant believes is not complete, because the applicant knows the military career ended in a way the applicant did not anticipate. An upgrade would allow the opportunity to hold one's head a little higher. The applicant states that the Board should understand that during the Army career, the applicant was unware about having Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and the mind and thinking was not clear. While on active duty, the applicant never received counseling or was never offered help and was just discharged other than honorably. Currently, the applicant is undergoing treatment with the Department of Veterans Healthcare System for this condition. The applicant states, soon after coming home from deployment to Iraq, the applicant relocated from Fort Stewart to Fort Carson. The applicant then had trouble adapting to normal life and got arrested for the first time by vandalizing a vehicle of someone that the applicant did not even know. The applicant is ashamed and embarrassed to even think of what had been done. Because of this incident, the applicant was processed for discharge for being arrested. The applicant's understanding was since it was the first time being in trouble, the applicant could not be discharged for the first offense. While still going through the discharge process, the platoon sergeant released the applicant from the physical training formation to wash and clean a battle gear for turn in. While in the barracks, the first sergeant walked through the barracks and heard the applicant cleaning battle gear. The first sergeant knocked on the applicant's door and asked the applicant what was going on, to which the applicant responded with following orders to clean the battle gear. The first sergeant then told the applicant that he smelled alcohol on the applicant's breath. The applicant explained to the first sergeant that the applicant had gone out with some battle buddies and they returned late, which was the reason for the alcohol on the applicant's breath; and, not that the applicant was up at five in the morning drinking. The applicant informed the first sergeant that the battle buddies could prove the applicant was telling the truth, but the first sergeant did not want to hear it and proceeded to search the room. Though no alcohol was found, the first sergeant still wrote the applicant up as being drunk on duty and drinking during duty. The applicant states, the first sergeant knew he could not put the applicant out of service on the first offense, so he used being drunk on duty to discharge the applicant. The applicant did not fight it because as long as the applicant was there, the applicant would always be singled out, so the applicant accepted it and got away from the situation. The applicant is now married and the wife noticed the applicant has been dealing with issues over the years and needed to get professional help. The applicant has been talking with a VA counselor who is starting to determine that the applicant has been dealing with deep depression and PTSD. The applicant had been to war, came home and within a year of coming from Iraq, was arrested for the first time in life. The applicant still questions oneself of why the applicant made a huge mistake of being arrested. The applicant has worked for almost 14 years for the Florida Department of Corrections and is now a sergeant. The applicant is not a trouble maker, just someone who made some mistakes, for which the applicant has paid for and now has a hard time adjusting to civilian life. The applicant is receiving help and requests the Board grant a fair decision, which would mean the world to have served the country and to be discharged honorably. 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 due to the period of service, the applicant does not have any active duty records. Post-service, the applicant has been diagnosed with Depressive Disorder NOS. The applicant does not currently have a service- connected rating from the VA. The applicant does not currently have a diagnosis of PTSD. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnosis is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 July 2019, and by a 4-1 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: 24 November 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 October 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He was intoxicated while on duty and charged with criminal civil conviction for criminal mischief. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 October 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 October 2004 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 November 2002 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 87 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 4 years, 9 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 25 February 2000 - 22 November 2002 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (23 September 2003 - 11 August 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: PUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 2 September 2004, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. Register of Action (Colorado Court Document), dated 14 October 2004, reflects the applicant was arrested on 11 August 2004, for Criminal Mischief - $100 - $500. On 12 October 2004, the applicant plead guilty to the charge and was sentenced to one year unsupervised probation; 40 hours of community service; and, court costs and restitution of $3292. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; self-authored statement; four letters of support. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has been receiving treatment and has been employed for 14 years. 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 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. 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 contends the event that caused his discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that he was suffering from undiagnosed PTSD, but is now receiving treatment. However, the service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good chara after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 29 July 2019, and by a 4-1 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 AR20190002183 1