1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 June 2019 b. Date Received: 24 September 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 effect, his discharge was for alcohol related incidents. The applicant has a current disability rating of a 100 percent for PTSD. The Army Behavior Health was treating him for an adjustment disorder. The applicant states, he was self-medicating the symptoms of PTSD after two deployments by excessively drinking alcohol. The applicant was diagnosed with Chronic PTSD and provides evidence his application, which reflects that the symptoms of PTSD can have a delay of months or even years. 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 with anxiety and depressed mood; Alcohol Abuse; Alcohol Dependence; PTSD. The applicant is 100% service-connected from the VA. In summary, the applicant has 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 23 September 2020, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 5 April 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 21 October 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 4 November 2012, he was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol with a BAC of 0.15 percent; On 5 November 2012, he failed to report to his appointed place of duty; On 5 November 2012, he failed out of Warrior Leader Course for excessive tardiness; Between 5 November 2012 and 3 August 2013, he failed to obey a lawful order to not drive on any military installation; On 15 April 2013, for a second time, he failed out of Warrior Leader Course for failing the initial APFT; and, On 3 August 2013, for a second time, he was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol with a BAC of 0.21 percent. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 25 October 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 15 January 2014, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 25 February 2014, the applicant conditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 28 February 2014, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's conditional wavier. On 3 March 2014, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant's discharge with characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). On 14 March 2014, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 14 March 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 11 August 2007 / 6 years / On 14 March 2012, the applicant extended his enlistment by two months. According to the Oath of Extension of Enlistment document, it reflects a new ETS of 10 April 2015; however, it appears the document was in error, as a two-month extension should have given the applicant a new ETS of 10 October 2013. The service record is void of any enlistment document, which would have extended the applicant's service beyond 10 October 2013. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 113 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 89D10, EOD Specialist / 9 years, 10 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 21 February 2002 - 16 July 2003 / UNC IADT, 6 June 2002 - 16 August 2002 / UNC (Concurrent Service) (Break in Service) USMC, 28 April 2004 - 6 May 2004 / UNC (Break in Service) RA, 27 October 2005 - 10 August 2007 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (27 April 2007 - 2 July 2008 / 17 October 2009 - 14 September 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3, AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-3CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2 g. Performance Ratings: 24 January 2009 - 23 January 2010 / Fully Capable 24 January 2010 - 22 January 2011 / Fully Capable 22 January 2011 - 24 April 2013 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 7 November 2012, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Failure to Obey Traffic Control Device (No Lest Turn) (On Post) and, Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (On Post). Service School Academic Evaluation Report, dated 15 November 2012, reflects the applicant failed to achieve course standards for the Warrior Leader Course, due to excessive tardiness. Judgment in a Criminal Case, Western District of Washington, dated 27 February 2013, reflects the applicant plead guilty to Negligent Driving, 1ST Degree. Summary of Rehabilitation Efforts, dated 13 August 2013, reflects the ASAP Clinical Director, recommended the applicant be declared a rehabilitation failure (IAW AR 600-85 para 10-6b2) so treatment may be afforded to the applicant through the Veteran's Administration Hospital. Rehabilitation failures are better served by the Veteran's Administration Health Care services, which provide long-term residential treatment and are able to address co-occurring*conditions. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 12 August 2013, reflects the applicant self-referred for a mental status evaluation. The applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depressed mood and Alcohol dependence in remission. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 3 October 2013, 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. The applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depressed mood and Alcohol dependence in remission. Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 27 March 2014, reflects the applicant was treated for: Chronic, PTSD, Adjustment Disorder with anxiety and depressed mood; and, alcohol dependence with episodic drinking behavior. The applicant provided a copy of his VA disability rating decision, dated 11 May 2016, which reflects the applicant was rated 100 percent disability for PTSD and unspecified depressive disorder with traumatic injury. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; VA Rating Decision; SF 600; Privacy Release Form; PTSD Diagnostic Criteria; third party letter; 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 14-12b 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 that he was suffering from PTSD, which affected his behavior and led to his discharge. The applicant contends he is now rated 100 percent disabled by the VA for PTSD. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depressed mood and Alcohol dependence in remission; however, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 3 October 2013, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation, which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears, the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. 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 23 September 2020, 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 AR20190012347 4