1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 March 2020 b. Date Received: 7 May 2020 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 served for almost 18 years all over the world. The applicant had 11 deployments that in time took their toll and his career ended up costing him his marriage. The applicant states an injury to his right leg, while serving in Delta Force, changed his life. He has never been able to walk without pain and all of these factors, along with a very hostile divorce, put caused him mental strain from which he has never recovered. The applicant's last unit put him on three back to back deployments that were severely straining along with his divorce and PTSD. The applicant served as a CJSOTF 1SG in Qatar and stood up the SOJTF-OJR J6 as the first Senior Enlisted Leader, all while losing his kids and being mentally attacked. 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 Anxiety Disorder related to psychosocial stressors. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with PTSD. The applicant is 70% service connected for PTSD, source unspecified. 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 30 October 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 July 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 16 November 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 30 May 2016, while deployed and under the influence of alcohol, he attempted to force his way into a female Sailor's quarters. The applicant was detained and administered a chemical breath test revealing a blood alcohol content of .12 percent. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 March 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 3 March 2018, 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. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 April 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 April 2012 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / Bachelor's Degree / 118 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-8 / 25U5S, Signal Support System Specialist / 17 years, 8 months, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 26 October 2000 - 2 May 2005 / HD RA, 3 May 2005 - 10 May 2007 / HD RA, 11 May 2007 - 23 April 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Germany, Italy, Iraq, Libya, Qatar / Afghanistan (20 August 2002 - 16 November 2002; 24 February 2005 - 23 February 2006; 9 May 2007 - 21 July 2008); Burkina Faso (28 August 2013 - 31 October 2013); Iraq (26 March 2003 - 24 March 2004); Libya (15 February 2014 - 11 March 2014); Qatar (24 March 2015 - 13 May 2015; 7 July 2015 - 8 October 2015; 27 January 2016 - 3 June 2016) f. Awards and Decorations: BSM-2, MSM, JSCOM-3, ARCOM-6, JSAM-3, AAM-3, JMUA-3, MUC, VUA, ASUA, AGCM-5, NDSM, GWOTEM-2, GWOTSM, ACM-3CS, HSM, ICM- CS, NCOPDR-3, ASR, OSR-5, MOVSM, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: 1 February 2012 - 7 July 2012 / Among The Best 7 July 2012 - 10 January 2013 / Among The Best 11 January 2013 - 10 January 2014 / NIF 11 January 2014 - 22 May 2014 / NIF 23 May 2014 - 12 March 2015 / Among The Best 13 May 2015 - 31 December 2015 / Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 5 January 2017, for disorderly conduct and attempted unlawful entry. On 30 May 2016, while deployed and under the influence of alcohol, you attempted to force your way into a female Sailor's quarters without authority. You were detained and administered a chemical breath test revealing a blood alcohol content of .12%. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 12 October 2017, 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: with anxiety and depressed mood. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; Privacy Authorization Release Form; FY16 Training and Selection List; Enlisted Record Brief; 10 character reference letters. 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 that he was having family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends he was suffering from PTSD and mental anguish from his divorce and a leg injury, which affected his behavior and led to his discharge. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service depression; 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 12 October 2017, 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 applicant contends that he had good service, which included four combat tours and several deployments. 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 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 30 October 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 / 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 AR20200004986 1