1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 October 2019 b. Date Received: 21 October 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, he believes the records to be in error or unjust due to undiagnosed, misdiagnosed, or untreated mental health condition, including Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) with alcohol use disorder- leading to the events which lead to his discharge. 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 50% service connected 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 14 October 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, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service PTSD diagnosis), and prior period of honorable service. 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 14 February 2019 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 October 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He operated a motor vehicle while intoxicated on two separate occasions and was drunk on duty. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 16 October 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 14 January 2019, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 7 December 2018, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant's discharge with characterization of service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. On 7 February 2019, 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: 7 February 2019 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 5 March 2015 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / GED / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 25Q30, Multichannel Transmission Systems Operator-Maintainer / 10 years, 9 months, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 24 April 2008 - 1 December 2011 / HD RA, 2 December 2011 - 4 March 2015 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Afghanistan (27 April 2009 - 27 March 2010); Kuwait (3 January 2013 - 11 September 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3, AAM-5, MUC, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ACM-2CS, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2, MOVSM g. Performance Ratings: 1 May 2015 - 10 February 2016 / Qualified 10 February 2016 - 8 February 2017 / Highly Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 6 July 2017, for driving while intoxicated. On 15 April 2018, he left the Gringo Theory Bar in his car, drove directly into the rear end of a moving vehicle and continued to drive straight into a guardrail. El Paso Police Officers found the applicant on the scene with bloodshot eyes, slurred speech and smelling like alcohol. The applicant refused a standardized field sobriety test. A breathalyzer test confirmed his blood alcohol content to be .319. The applicant's misconduct was in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Texas Penal Code. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 29 May 2018, 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: Unspecified Problems Related to Employment. The applicant provided a copy of his VA rated disabilities, dated 15 February 2019, which reflects the applicant was rated 50 percent disability for PTSD with alcohol use disorder (also claimed as nightmare disorder, insomnia, anxiety, depression, social phobia, sleep disturbances and memory loss). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; service-connected disability compensation certification; VA Rated Disabilities report. 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 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 he was suffering from undiagnosed PTSD, which affected his behavior and led to his discharge. The applicant contends the VA has granted him a service connected disability for PTSD. 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 reflects that on 29 May 2018, 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. Further, 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service 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 14 October 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, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service PTSD diagnosis), and prior period of honorable service. 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 AR20190015195 3