1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 June 2019 b. Date Received: 27 December 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, after his second deployment in 14 months, he was undiagnosed with PTSD. The unit climate in both units were not conducive to seeking both diagnosis and treatment for PTSD. Based on this perception, he abused alcohol to cope with PTSD, resulting in two Driving Under the Influence charges and his separation under other than honorable conditions. The applicant's commander recommended a general discharge. The applicant's JAG counsel at the time, advised him that based on the applicant's actual character of service, history of multiple deployments, over ten years of unblemished service and his rank of SSG, that a general discharge was appropriate. The Discharge Review Board decision of an Other Than Honorable discharge was a complete surprise to the applicant, his chain of command and his counsel. The applicant states, LTC R., who was a member of the board, worked with the applicant at Bassett Army Community Hospital and performed the applicant's separation physical. The professional work relationship should have made her ineligible for membership on the board. The applicant did not initially challenge her inclusion on the board, as it was the responsibility of the board president to ensure all members had no conflict of interest or knowledge of the Soldier in order to render a fair and unbiased decision. The applicant states, he had a period of time that he struggled with PTSD and it cost him his military career, after over 10 years of stellar evaluations. The other than honorable discharge has been a steep price to pay in terms of lost benefits and civilian opportunities. Since those early days, he has come a long way. The applicant has used the skills and resiliency lessons he was taught to get through some very difficult hardships. The applicant is closer to his daughter and is now engaged. The applicant attends college where he is pursuing his degree in Business. While going to school, he was offered a full-time job at First Step, a drug and alcohol recovery center. The applicant is now able to help people once again that are afflicted by drugs and alcohol. The applicant is proud to say he is a part of the solution to the problem he caused years ago. The applicant suffered the consequences of his actions for years and it has been a disabling action for him to try to move forward. The applicant requests the Board consider his 10 years of service and how he has still rebounded and is no longer hindered. The applicant only asks so that he may pursue his absolute best opportunity to provide for his family. The upgrade would allow him to seek more job opportunities, and to be an honorable member of the service and the country that he loves dearly. 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, unspecified/ with depressed mood; Alcohol Abuse; Alcohol Dependence; PTSD; Sleep Disorder, organic. VA Medical records indicate that the applicant's VA medical record contains only DOD content due to his discharge characterization of UOTHC. 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 13 November 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 (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: 11 February 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 22 June 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He was arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) of alcohol on 11 October 2014 and 20 March 2015. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 June 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 24 June 2015, 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 17 July 2015, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's conditional waiver and appointed an administrative separation board to review the applicant's case. On 20 October 2015, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 9 November 2015, 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 25 November 2015, 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 Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 25 November 2015 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 May 2012 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 68W20, Health Care Specialist / 11 years, 4 months, 7 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 26 June 2008 - 3 May 2012 / HD / The applicant's DD Form 214, reflects the applicant had Prior Active Service and Inactive Prior Service; however, the applicant's service record is void of any prior service other than noted above. e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska, Korea, SWA / Afghanistan (26 January 2012 - 5 January 2013; 19 April 2014 - 6 October 2014); Iraq (3 March 2006 - 28 June 2006) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, ARCOM-4, AAM-4, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ICM-CSS, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2, USNSSDR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 15 March 2013 - 13 February 2014 / Among The Best 14 February 2014 - 13 February 2015 / Fully Capable 14 February 2015 - 11 February 2016 / Not Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 16 April 2015, for driving under the influence of alcohol in Fairbanks, Alaska on 11 October 2014. The Fairbanks Police stopped the applicant for driving on the shoulder of the roadway and failing to use his signal during two lane changes. Upon contact, the Officer noted his speech was very slurred and he admitted to drinking alcohol. Subsequently, he failed a series of Standardized Field Sobriety Tests and provided a breath sample resulting in a Breath Alcohol Content (BrAC) of .218 percent. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 24 April 2015, for driving under the influence of alcohol with a suspended driver's license in Fairbanks, Alaska on 20 March 2015. The Fairbanks Police Officer initiated contact with the applicant after responding to a report of a possible DUI and observed the applicant's vehicle weaving in its lane of travel. Upon contact, the Officer noted a strong odor of alcohol emitting from his person, very slow deliberate manual dexterity, severely slurred speech, and bloodshot watery eyes. The applicant refused to perform the Standardized Field Sobriety Test Subsequently, he provided a breath sample resulting in a Breath Alcohol Content (BAC) of .228 percent. FG Article 15, dated 6 August 2015, for being found drunk while on duty (17 July 2015); and, violating the conditions of his parole by consuming alcohol (17 July 2015). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-5; forfeiture of $1,553 pay (suspended); and, oral reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 27 October 2015, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with: PTSD, Mild (moderate if under stress; Adjustment Disorder; Alcohol Dependence, in new recovery. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; USARAK Form 298; case separation documents; SARP letter; Certificate of Achievement; Most Improved Patient certificate. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he is pursuing his degree in Business and has a full-time job at First Step, a drug and alcohol recovery center. 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 under other than 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 undiagnosed PTSD, which affected his behavior and led to his discharge. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service PTSD, Mild (moderate if under stress; Adjustment Disorder; Alcohol Dependence; 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 applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The applicant contends his administrative separation was improper because a board member had worked with the applicant previously. However, 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 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 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 applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 13 November 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 (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 AR20200000001 6