1. Applicant's Name: Application Date: 9 May 2016 b. Date Received: 16 May 2016 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 has missed excellent job opportunities because his current discharge is not acceptable to the employers. Unforeseen behavioral health issues, such as depression, anxiety, and sleep issues, causing his tardiness, missed formations, and incomplete work, ultimately led to his discharge. He was finally diagnosed in 2012, and has received many counseling sessions with medications to help him. Otherwise, his military service was flawless. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had no behavioral health diagnoses in AHLTA. He was seen 3 times-twice in 2010 and once in 2011-for Insomnia. About six months after leaving the VA, he was diagnosed Anxiety. In 2015 he was also diagnosed with Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder, recurrent. He has a 90% service-connected disability rating by the VA in JLV as of 28 July 2017. There was no adequate documentation that psychiatric illness had any role in his various instances of misconduct, even though it is conceivable that his insomnia could have made being on time to formation a challenge. It would not excuse not shaving, not showing up to an APFT, being behind on his rent by 2 months, or going to the ER without telling command on a day he was scheduled for a diagnostic AFPT. He was cleared for discharge in a Mental Status Exam done on 06 June 2012. The exam specifically noted he had no relevant Axis I diagnoses. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 04 August 2017, 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 (Minor Infractions) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12a / JKN / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 18 October 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 September 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant failed to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on divers occasions, and he disobeyed an NCO. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 20 September 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 October 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 11 January 2010 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 91D10, Power-Generation Equipment Specialist / 2 years, 9 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard indicates the applicant failed record APFTs on 27 January 2012 and 15 March 2012. Negative counseling statements for being informed of an involuntary separation action being initiated; being out of ranks on several occasions; missing his second APFT; not shaving according to AR 670-1; not informing his chain of command of being at the emergency room when he was scheduled for a diagnostic APFT; being two months behind on his rent; failing the record APFT; being flagged; and being indebted to the US Government. CG Article 15, dated 26 July 2012, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on five separate occasions on 3, 4, and 22 May 2012, and 16 and 14 April 2012, and disobeying an NCO on 7 May 2012. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $319, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 June 2012, psychiatrically cleared the applicant for Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b consideration. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 4 June 2016, and Rated Disabilities, dated in May or June 2016, does not provide any identification. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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 14-12a addresses minor disciplinary infractions, defined as a pattern of misconduct, consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. 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 "JKN" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, misconduct (minor infractions). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKN" 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." "Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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, and 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. By the incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence 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 behavioral health issues contributed to his discharge from the Army. However, the service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no identifiable evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication. The documentary evidence submitted with his application that lists rated disabilities does not provide an identification of the issuer or to whom the listed disabilities applied to. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents, i.e., the medical documents that support his behavioral health issues that officially identify him as the patient diagnosed with the medical condition, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The applicant contends he missed several excellent job opportunities, a contention 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 applicant contends other than the results of his behavioral health issues, his service was flawless. In consideration of his service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. 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 04 August 2017, 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 new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160009438 1