1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 10 February 2016 b. Date Received: 16 February 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 and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, after arriving to Advanced Individual Training (AIT), he received unfortunate and devastating news that his father had passed away. The applicant states that he wanted to give up but he stayed strong, he graduated on time, and was later stationed at Fort Campbell. The applicant never had the opportunity to receive counseling for his loss while in AIT and was advised to seek therapy once he settled in at Fort Campbell. The applicant states that he began having nightmares, had difficulty sleeping, which resulted in him oversleeping causing him to show up to physical training (PT) a few minutes late. The applicant details, in great length, from the time he makes the decision to reach out to his supervisor, SGT P, to request assistance in receiving the therapy; to the abuse of power that he, along with his fellow Soldiers, endured from SGT P; to the rationale on why he delayed going forward with seeking therapy; to his emotionally draining road to recovery; and finally, to his subsequent discharge from the Army. Following his discharge, the applicant returned home and continued therapy to work on himself mentally. The applicant contends that his current discharge has caused him to miss out on several job opportunities. The applicant is currently repaying a student loan, which is causing him more hardship due to the fact that he does not have access to his GI Bill. He believes he is still a young Soldier and has contemplated the possibly of rejoining the Armed Forces, but due to his discharge, he was told it would be nearly impossible to rejoin. The narrative reason for his separation labels his self-worth as a past Soldier. He never once said to anyone in his command, therapist, family, or friends that he wanted out of the military. He does not want everything that he has worked for and the pain that he has endured to be meaningless. He was proud wearing his uniform and serving his country and he believes that he should not have to have to omit his service on application, in pursuing his education, or in any form that he deserves. When he reads his discharge, he feels a heavy burden in his heart because it hinders him from his future goals. Poor leadership is to blame for his situation and he requests the Board to have mercy on him. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant's AHLTA diagnoses include ADHD, Predominantly Inattentive type (one visit 2006, as dependent), ADHD (hyperactive, 6 visits 2007), Adjustment Disorder, Obesity (2013, 2014, 2015), and Obesity Morbid 2014, 2015). A pre-discharge Mental Status Exam on 7 January cleared him for administrative, found him negative for PTSD and TBI, and concluded he met medical retention standards. In the JLV he showed as rated 50 percent service-connected disabled by the VA. He had no entries on his VA problem list. Although the member's history is sad, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that his repeated counselings were the product of a mental condition. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 17 May 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 28 September 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 March 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: failed to report to his place of duty on divers occasions (between on or about 14 March 2014 and on or about 27 August 2014); and, disobeyed a lawful order from SGT P to clean your barracks room (15 July 2014). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 March 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 May 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 February 2013 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25U10, Signal Support System Specialist / 2 years, 7 Months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 5 June 2014, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (14 March, 15 April and 13 May 2014). The punishment consisted of extra duty for 7 days and a written reprimand. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms for failing to report to his appointed place of duty at time prescribed; failing to report; failing to maintain a clean and inspectable barracks room; disobeying order; failure to be in correct uniform; failure to shave; failure to ensure his phone battery was charged; and, intent to separate from service. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 7 January 2015, reflects the applicant was cleared for 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 had a (Axis I) Deferred diagnosis. Extract of the applicant's Active Duty medical record, dated 27 September 2013, reflects the applicant was treated for (Axis I) Adjustment Disorder. 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, 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 requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. 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 be retained on active duty. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed because it hinders his opportunities for employment. 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 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 the behavior which led to his discharge was due to mental health issues. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Adjustment Disorder; 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 7 January 2015, 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 desires to rejoin the Military Service. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The applicant contends that he had poor leadership and was harrased by a member of his chain of command; 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. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. Accordingly, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge and did not know how to deal with his situation. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. 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 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 17 May 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 AR20160004068 2