1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 March 2019 b. Date Received: 5 April 2019 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, had severe behavioral health issues that attributed to the behavior warranted the discharge. The applicant never received proper care to assist in recovering from a deployment to Iraq. The applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, Bipolar Disorder and Adjustment Disorder with explosive outbursts; and had suicidal tendencies after deployment. The wife at the time was destroying the home and the applicant received no assistance from the unit or command. The applicant's relationship with the wife at the time was unstable due to the loss of their son before birth; the applicant did not have time to grieve the loss or bond with the wife on how get pass the loss. 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, Bereavement, Partner Relational Problem, Bipolar Disorder NOS, Explosive Disorder, and FAP Involvement. 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 18 March 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed 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: Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 December 2008 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 14 November 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he missed movement to the National Training Center (15 September 2008); he failed to report to his appointed place of duty x13 (15 February 2008, 16 June 2008, 18 June 2008, 10 July 2008, 14 July 2008, 4 August 2008, 6 August 2008, 13 August 2008, 18 August 2008, 21 August 2008, 24 August 2008, 25 August 2008, 27 August 2008); and he was AWOL x2 (4 September 2008 to 5 September 2008 and 14 September 2008 to 15 September 2008). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 November 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 November 2008 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 January 2005 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / HS Graduate / 92 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 3 years, 10 months, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait / Iraq, 1 October 2006 to 29 November 2007 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-2BSS, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 3 October 2008, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (18 July 2008); and through neglect miss movement to NTC with which you were required in the course of duty to move (3 September 2008); reduction to PFC / E-3, forfeiture of $417 pay for one month, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct; and being informed of pending separation action. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL x2 for 3 days, 4 September 2008 to 4 September 2008 for 1 day and 14 September 2008 to 15 September 2008 for 2 days; mode of return for both periods are unknown. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA mental health document, dated 5 December 2018, revealed the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, TBI and Bipolar disorder; and he was prescribed medications for these conditions. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 214; and medical records (10 pages); pre-deployment health assessment (six pages); VA summary of benefits letter; My HealtheVet, personal information report (65 pages). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted 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. 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 misconduct (serious offense), 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, he had severe behavioral health issues that attributed to his behavior which warranted his discharge. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his behavioral health issues was the reason for his discharge. The applicant further contends, he never received proper care to assist him in recovering from his deployment to Iraq. The record of evidence shows that the applicant while on active duty was treated at military facility for several physical and mental health issues. The applicant also contends, he was diagnosed with PTSD, Bipolar Disorder and Adjustment Disorder with explosive outbursts; and he had suicidal tendencies after his deployment. VA mental health document, relates the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, TBI and Bipolar disorder; and he was prescribed medications for these conditions. The applicant additionally contends, his wife at the time was destroying his home and he received no assistance from his unit or command; and his relationship with his wife at the time was unstable due to the loss of their son before birth; he did not have time to grieve the loss or bond with his wife on how get pass the loss. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. 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 18 March 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed 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 AR20190005953 1