1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 October 2014 b. Date Received: 16 March 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, his military service records do not reflect any recorded misconduct. Minor infractions are not enough to eliminate the GI Bill benefits for a Soldier who deployed to Southwest Asia in support of combat operations and remained there for almost 12 months. The applicant's mental health condition was not considered by his chain of command at the time of his separation. As a child, the applicant was sexually abused by a swimming coach and now suffers from PTSD. The damage caused by this traumatic event is the root of any unusual behavior observed by the applicant's chain of command. Further, the applicant states his post-service conduct warrants an upgrade. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant's Case file, AHLTA and JLV were reviewed. AHLTA notes indicate a pattern of bizarre behaviors. He was found fit for duty but mental health did not clear him for deployment because of his anxiousness and inability to get along with his fellow Soldiers. Command reported he required constant supervision. Seen next in 2010, referred by command, found to be fit for duty. Was having conflicts with his 1SG. Seen in 2011 while deployed and referred by command because of difficulty meeting basic standards and for not getting along with others. Applicant reported he had problems with getting into trouble at work in both national guard and while on active duty dating back to 2008. Command reported he had poor hygiene, lack of cleanliness, not paying proper respect to superiors, not locking his room. His NCO reported service member behaved inappropriately-would strike up conversations with random people, making them uncomfortable and causing them to leave. NCO said he could not follow basic instructions or meet basic standards. He was given no psychiatric diagnosis at this time but was given a rule out Schizoid personality disorder. Seen again in March 2012-brought in by command and diagnosed with Adjustment DO and Borderline PD. In April 2012, diagnosed with Personality Disorder NOS with Borderline, Schizotypal and Antisocial traits. Psychological testing was done at this time, but results were found to be invalid due to applicant's guardedness and defensiveness. Review of VA records indicates applicant has been found to be 50 percent SC for anxiety and asthma. His VA diagnosis is Anxiety Disorder NOS. There is no documentation in either his military or VA medical records of applicant reporting he was sexually abused as a child. Based on the information available at this time, the applicant does not have a mitigating Behavioral Health disorder for the offenses leading to his discharge from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 2 June 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, after carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of his service to include his combat service and the matters surrounding his discharge (50% Service Connected Rating (Anxiety) & In-Service Anxiety diagnosis). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant 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: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12a / JKN / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 July 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 July 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 6 November 2011, he failed to obey a lawful order; and, On divers occasions, between on or about 27 January 2012 and 16 February 2012, he failed to report to his appointed place of duty. (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: 28 July 2010 / 3 years, 2 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92G10, Food Service Operation / 5 years, 2 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 28 April 2007 - 25 August 2008 / NA IADT, 26 August 2008 - 13 November 2008 / HD ARNG, 14 November 2008 - 28 July 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait (18 January 2011 - 3 December 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, AFRMD g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a letter from a school psychologist, dated 8 August 2002, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with a Nonverbal Learning Disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Graduated from Western Illinois University; works as a driver for Uber; and, has no criminal record. 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, misconduct (minor infractions). 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 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. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12a, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions). The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Minor Infractions)," and the separation code is "JKN." 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 his chain of command did not consider his mental health condition during the separation process. 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 applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because his record contains no acts of misconduct and the applicant does not recall any misconduct that would result in his discharge. 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 this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discriminated. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence of an injustice has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. Further, 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 applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour and that his minor infraction was not enough to eliminate his GI benefits. 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. Further, 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 Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the characterization 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. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good conduct after leaving the Army; 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 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 2 June 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, after carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of his service to include his combat service and the matters surrounding his discharge (50% Service Connected Rating (Anxiety) & In-Service Anxiety diagnosis). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant 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 AR20160005981 6