1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 July 2019 b. Date Received: 8 July 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he received an Article 15 for not saluting his commander while at NTC training. He knowingly did not disrespect his commander. He tried explaining that he was having a panic attack or having multiple panic attacks. (The applicant detailed the circumstances surrounding the events that led to his discharge.) The applicant asserts that when he enlisted in 2015, his recruiter gave him 20 days to visit his wife, daughter, and newborn son in Nepal. While in Nepal, a massive earthquake occurred followed by a few days of aftershocks. He panicked during that period, seeing people buried and homes destroyed. He heard the death toll had reached 10,000. He reported to Fort Jackson for basic training immediately after his recruiter contacted him in Italy to return. He worried about his wife and children, whom remained in Nepal. He was depressed, had trouble relaxing and sleeping. After completing AIT at Fort Lee, he reported to South Korea, his first duty station. Six months later, he leave was approved to visit his family in Italy; however, he sprained his lower back. After receiving treatment, he visited his family. When he returned, it was difficult for him to exercise, and his anxiety and depression grew worse. He sought treatment with mental health. Upon receiving an assignment to Fort Riley, his application for his family to join him was finally approved. After his family arrived, and when his unit was alerted for NTC training for 45 days and an assignment to Germany for one year, he started to panic, because his wife did not speak English and did not know how to operate a vehicle. He did not have any relative to take care of his family. At NTC, he experienced medical issues and panic attacks. He was worried about his family and his health. He became suicidal and was admitted into a mental hospital for a few weeks. Upon returning to Fort Riley, and when he started seeing a medical provider for PTSD, he was informed he would be medically boarded for his condition; however, he received an Article 15 for not saluting his commander and subsequently, he was discharged. 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 PTSD. The applicant is 100% service-connected from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Bipolar Disorder, PTSD, and Substance Use Disorder. 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 28 August 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was improper. Based on the applicant's length of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH, and service- connected PTSD diagnosis), the proper discharge and separation procedures were not followed in this case. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable, 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 14 July 2017 c. Separation Facts: (The specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the applicant's discharge from the Army is NIF; however, information below is based on limited documentary evidence by the applicant.) (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 June 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 20 April 2017, the applicant failed to follow multiple orders given to him by a commissioned officer, and an order by a noncommissioned officer. The applicant was disrespectful to the commissioned officer by responding to every statement with "Why." (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 27 June 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: In an undated memorandum / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 July 2017 / 3 years, 23 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 30 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 1 year, 11 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM; NDSM; GWOTSM; KDSM; ASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Discharge Orders i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant's documentary evidence: Report of Medical History, dated 2 June 2017, indicates the applicant and examiner noted behavioral health issues, including being hospitalized for PTSD, and treatment. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 June 2017, reflects a medical diagnosis of PTSD (2nd to earthquake 2015 and depression). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 3 July 2019, with applicant-authored statement; applicant's rebuttal to Article 15, dated 2 June 2017; spouse's statement; DD Form 214. Additional evidence: An incomplete separation file. 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. After carefully examining the applicant's available military records, there are insufficient mitigating factors to make a determination upon the quality of the applicant's service and the merit of his issues. The applicant's record is void of the documentary evidence of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's documentary evidence consisting of limited record of his separation, does confirm 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 behavioral health issues involving suffering from multiple panic attacks and being treated for PTSD, were carefully considered. A careful review of the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues along with 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 applicant's indirect contentions that he is entitled to an upgrade of his discharge because of mitigating circumstances which contributed to his discharge, were carefully considered. Specifically, he claims stress with family issues at home contributed to his discharge. While the applicant may believe his stress at home and work was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from stress through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. The available record furnished by the applicant 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. Based on the available record, 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 28 August 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was improper. Based on the applicant's length of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH, and service-connected PTSD diagnosis), the proper discharge and separation procedures were not followed in this case. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable, 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 AR20190010749 1