1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 11 May 2015 b. Date Received: 8 June 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he issued a statement to his NCO, SFC G, who understood the nature of why he altered his military ID and entered a premises where alcoholic beverage was served. He received and served a punishment with him, and that was his last issue until 22 February 2012. As a battalion paralegal in S-1, he had multiple NCOs to follow. (The applicant detailed the circumstances and events surrounding the additional incidents that led to his discharge.) The applicant adds he was not allowed to show he had rehabilitation on four of the six charges placed in his packet, which were within 30 days of each other. He was undergoing psychiatric help as well as other issues. When he tried to get help, none of his NCOs except SGT H, his immediate supervisor, tried to help him. Being under three different NCOs, he could not keep up with everything they tried to tell him. His NCO and officer both wrote letters stating that his behavior in that month was unusual and inconsistent with the previous years, and that he had rehabilitation potential. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had no mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. There were no encounter notes for this applicant in the active duty electronic medical records. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 August 2016, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 6 April 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 30 January 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: failed to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on four separate occasions; altered his military ID card and entered a premises where alcoholic beverages were sold, while under the age of 21 (4 July 2011); and, failed to obey an order by SGT H, who was his team leader, to carry with his IBA and ACH everywhere he went, other than the dining facility, from 0630 to close of business. (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 30 January 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: Undated / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 27 July 2010 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-3 / 27D10, Paralegal Specialist / 3 years, 3 months, 14 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: DEP, 23 December 2009 – 26 July 2010 / NA e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Alaska / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM; NDSM; GWTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for failing to follow instructions, failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on several occasions, and failing to follow through his place of action. Municipality of Anchorage Police Department Arrest Report, dated 4 July 2011, indicates the applicant was arrested for liquor violation. CG Article 15, dated 7 September 2012, for failing to be a his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on three separate occasions (6 June 2012, 16 May 2012, and 22 February 2012), and disobeying an NCO (between 29 May 2012 and 28 June 2012). The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: DA Form 3822, Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 January 2013, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) Anxiety D/O NOS; Panic D/O, Insomnia (all by history); V62.2 Occupational problem.” DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 31 October 2012, indicates the applicant was being treated for behavioral health issues. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 11 May 2015; DD Form 214; Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 January 2013; Report of Medical Examination, dated 13 November 2012; Report of Medical Assessment, dated 31 October 2012; Report of Medical History, dated 31 October 2012; and Hearing Conservation Data, dated 20 September 2012. 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 14-12b, pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" 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 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. 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’s contentions were carefully 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 sufficient 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 sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant’s contentions regarding his behavioral health issues were carefully considered. A careful review of the applicant’s record and his documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. 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 contends none of his NCOs, except for one, tried to help him. The record of evidence indicates, before initiating discharge proceedings, the command ensured the applicant was appropriately counseled about his deficiencies which could lead to separation, and made an assessment of his potential for becoming a fully satisfactory Soldier. The evidence contained in the service record establishes the applicant was afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome noted deficiencies. As the applicant did not subsequently conform to required standards of discipline and performance, the command appropriately determined the applicant did not demonstrate the potential for further military service. The applicant contends the incidents that caused his discharge were unusual and inconsistent. However, the discrediting entries constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by even a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 31 August 2016, 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 a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable 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 OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150009834 1