1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 June 2016 b. Date Received: 7 July 2016 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant, through counsel, requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the requested relief should be granted under a theory of equity because the applicant's history of honorable service combined with the mitigating nature of his PTSD diagnosis substantially outweighs the brief period of minor infractions relied upon by the command to justify separation, thus the punishment inflicted, namely loss of substantial military benefits, negative impact on his post-service employability, are materially inequitable considering the totality of the circumstances. The requested relief should be granted under the theory of propriety because the command's failure to properly assess the applicant's quality of service in light of the de minimus incidents of misconduct, failure to properly consider the effects of his combat deployment on his actions and perceptions and failure to offer any rehabilitative services whatsoever represent an error of fact, law, procedure, or discretion wholly and unquestionably prejudicial to applicant. The command's failure to properly assess the applicant's quality of service, failure to properly consider the global effects of continued retention and failure to cite any evidence regarding "direct impact" as required by law and regulation combined with his substantial history of honorable service as compared to the single isolated period of misconduct meet the requirements under both propriety and equity; and, thus justice demands the applicant receive the requested relief. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant had a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. SMs active duty electronic medical records revealed diagnoses of Insomnia and an Adjustment Disorder while in Service. SM first saw behavioral health in April 2010 due to depressive symptoms to include decreased mood, low energy and motivation, irritability, and sleep problems. Military medical records indicated SM attributed his FTRs to sleep problems that started upon returning from Iraq. Medical note indicated SM had a stressful deployment and upon returning did not wear his deployment patch due to not wanting to represent events that occurred. He was involved in conducting patrol and escorting VIPs and reported sleeping whenever he had the chance. It was also noted that he changed companies 4 times due to interpersonal difficulties with leadership. Medical note dated 26 July 2016 indicated SM was seen accompanied by his wife (also a SM) who reported concern that SM believed he was being followed by military personnel and law enforcement. There was also increased anxiety, panic attacks, concentration problems, and suicidal ideation a few months prior. VA Medical Records indicated SM had diagnoses of PTSD, Depression, Bipolar Affective Disorder, and Delusional Disorder, persecutory type. He has had to inpatient hospitalizations for significant psychotic and manic symptoms with paranoid beliefs that he was being followed. In summary, there is a nexus between SMs misconduct and behavioral health symptoms. There is evidence based on AHLTA and VA medical records that suggests SM was likely experiencing psychiatric stressors while in service prior to the full onset of his Delusional Disorder. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 25 September 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. prior period of honorable service, in-service diagnosis of behavioral health issues and post-service 100% disability rating from the VA with diagnoses of service-connected PTSD and behavioral health issues) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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, Chapter 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 27 July 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: Undated / The applicant's service record is void of the separation proceedings. Counsel provided a copy of the notification of initiation of separation proceedings and a copy of the Commander's report. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 1 November 2010, he failed to report to PT formation at 1500, On 6 November 2010, he was disorderly in conduct; On 23 January 2011, he failed to report for his extra duty; and, On 10 February 2011, he failed to report to beach PT at 0600. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 March 2009 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist / 5 years, 5 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 15 February 2006 - 26 July 2007 / HD RA, 27 July 2007 - 6 March 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, Korea / Iraq (13 October 2008 - 3 October 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ICM-2, ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-2, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Counsel provided a copy of the Commander's report, undated, which reflects, the applicant received: A CG Article 15, imposed on 3 January 2011, the punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E3; forfeiture of $ 513.00 pay for two months, both suspended; and, extra duty for 14 days. A CG Article 15 imposed on 20 April 2011, the punishment consisted of a reduction to E2, forfeiture of $383.00 for two months, suspended, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his VA disability rating decision, dated 10 December 2014, which reflects the applicant was rated 100 percent disability for Delusional disorder persecutory type (previously denied as adjustment disorder with anxiety and insomnia). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application. 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12b, pattern of misconduct. 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, through counsel, requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's contentions in reference to his discharge being inequitable and improper were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The available 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 applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is "JKA." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends the VA has granted him a service connected disability for a Delusional disorder persecutory type. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition, at the time of separation, 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 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 the events that caused his discharge from the Army occurred during an isolated period in his career. Although a single incident or period, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow him access to benefits. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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 third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good work ethic; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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. Based on the available record, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 25 September 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. prior period of honorable service, in-service diagnosis of behavioral health issues and post-service 100% disability rating from the VA with diagnoses of service-connected PTSD and behavioral health issues) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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, Chapter 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, Chapter 14-12a e. Change SPD/RE Code to: Change SPD to JKN / No change to RE code f. Restore 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 AR20160012658 6