1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 December 2015 b. Date Received: 22 December 2015 c. Representative: 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 based on a personal issue with a senior NCO. His entire service record was not taken into account during his discharge and it was handled inappropriately. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had PTSD diagnosed during his Army service, with a good diagnostic evaluation occurring on 23 January 2014. He also suffered two concussions as a soldier. The first occurred during his deployment when he was exposed to a blast wave during a rocket attack without anything shielding him. Although he was dazed from the blast, a witness said the applicant kept his wits, and was able to function during the bombardment, though he began to suffer regularly from headaches after it, according to AHLTA records. A neurologist did not find that the applicant had mental deficits as a result of the blast. He suffered a second concussion in October 2013 when he was attacked and beaten unconscious. He apparently lost consciousness for less than 30 minutes. He did have amnesia for details of the assault on him. He is, as of 23 February 2017, rated 60 percent service-connected disabled by the VA. During his time in the Army he also struggled with alcohol, and this was most clear after his deployment, with him having diagnoses of Alcohol Abuse and Alcohol Dependence. Alcohol Intoxication was the sole new problem added by the VA to his problem list in the Joint Legacy viewer. Alcohol has remained a problem. He had an admission for Alcohol Disorders on 7 March 2015 and was discharged on 9 March 2015. Marital Problems was also listed. His wife felt, judging from the notes, that he was drinking too much, that communication had become poor, and he was prone to tantrums that included throwing things. These observations of the wife occurred in 2014 during marital therapy. The picture of the applicant is of a Soldier expressing signs and symptoms of PTSD. It is possible that his concussions had reduced his ability to control his responses. Unsurprisingly, his performance deteriorated, this is a Soldier who had become a SSG when in his 20s, and because of poor performance he was discharged under Chapter 13. This led to a General Discharge. There is more certainly enough evidence to mitigate his poor performance, especially when considered in relation to the good performance that would have made him a SSG at a fairly early age. In light of the totality of facts, a General Discharge seems too harsh for this Soldier. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 March 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization of service was improper. The Board noted that Army Regulation 635-200 requires the separation authority to state on the record that the misconduct from a previous enlistment was not considered for the purpose of characterization, the absence of such a statement makes the record irregular. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unsatisfactory Performance / AR 635- 200, Chapter 13 / JHJ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 7 August 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 July 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant's ability to perform his duties effectively was unlikely and his potential for advancement or leadership was unlikely due to the loss of his security clearance. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 July 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: Conditionally waived, 9 July 2014, contingent upon receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 23 July 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 October 2012 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 92 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 13F30, Fire Support Specialist / 7 years, 9 months, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 17 October 2006 to 27 March 2008 / HD RA, 28 March 2008 to 30 July 2008 / HD RA, 31 July 2008 to 24 October 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (6 October 2008 to 24 September 2009) and Afghanistan (1 October 2011 to 29 July 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AGCM-2, NDSM, ACM-2CS, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL, CAB, MUC-2 g. Performance Ratings: Three NCOERs rendered during period under current review: 1 September 2012 thru 20 May 2013, Among the Best 21 May 2013 thru 15 January 2014, Fully Capable 15 January 2014 thru 1 May 2014, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: There is no record of any actions under the UCMJ and the applicant was separated at the grade of E-6. Military Police Report, dated 23 April 2007, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for domestic battery Military Police Report, dated 17 March 2008, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for assaulting a child under 16. Military Police Report and Off-post Arrest report, dated 4 September 2011, with a county sheriff's office booking docket reflects the applicant was arrested by civil authorities driving while intoxicated on 3 September 2011. Report of Unfavorable Information for Security Determination, undated, rendered by the unit commander reflects the applicant's security clearance was revoked before arriving in current unit and that he was pending an involuntary separation. Negative counseling, dated 20 May 2014, for being informed that an involuntary separation under Chapter 13 was being initiated. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 20 May 2014, reflects the applicant noted behavioral health issues, and receiving treatment for TBI and PTSD. The examiner noted the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD and treatment for TBI. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 27 May 2017 (sic), reflects the diagnoses were deferred, positive screening for mTBI, and the applicant was cleared for Chapter 13 action as deemed appropriate by his command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application and DD Form 214. 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 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases. 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 "JHJ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for Unsatisfactory Performance. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JHJ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members' discharges. "Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre- existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service." 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. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because of unsatisfactory performance which diminished the quality of his service. 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. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because his discharge was based on a personal issue with an NCO and that his entire record was not considered. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. Although the applicant did not present any behavioral health issues, a careful review of the applicant's record reflects documented behavioral health issues along with notable service- connected post-traumatic stress disorder and mild traumatic brain injury symptoms existed. 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 service record contains documentary evidence of offenses the applicant committed in a prior period of service, specifically, three military reports and a civilian report. The government's presumption of regularity cannot be applied in this case because the command used documentary evidence of misconduct from a previous enlistment and the separation authority did not specifically state the earlier misconduct was not considered for the purpose of characterization. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-8b(2)(a), specifically requires the separation authority to state on the record that the misconduct from a previous enlistment was not considered for the purpose of characterization, the absence of such a statement makes the record irregular and the Army Discharge Review Board must consider this as an issue of fact when determining the applicant's characterization of service The discharge was not consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was not within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was not provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 March 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization of service was improper. The Board noted that Army Regulation 635-200 requires the separation authority to state on the record that the misconduct from a previous enlistment was not considered for the purpose of characterization, the absence of such a statement makes the record irregular. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20160001510 1