1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 January 2017 b. Date Received: 13 February 2017 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 change to his narrative reason for discharge to hardship / disability. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he believes his characterization and narrative reason for discharge are inaccurate as they are based on one incident in seven and a half years of nothing but honorable service. He contends that prior to this one mistake he had three deployments. After his second deployment (1st to Iraq) he fell to PTSD and severe depression and a back injury was worsening. After regaining himself he deployed to Iraq again in 2005-2006, during mid tour leave he lost his mother and his wife was hospitalized. This slowed him down a bit but he returned to his unit and completed his tour of duty. He made a poor decision, but believes it should not over shadow the sacrifices he made to his country. He is not looking for some special award or anything, he is just looking for what he believes to be accurate and believe an honorable discharge with a hardship or disability narrative would be accurate. He contends that he was not perfect and will not say that he was not wrong for what he did, but believes he served his country and brothers with honor, pride, selfless service, integrity, and dedication. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record the applicant did not have a mitigating medical or behavioral health condition for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. Medical records did indicate behavioral health treatment for mood and anxiety symptoms. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 July 2018, 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 12 May 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 April 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: violating a lawful general regulation, to wit; paragraph 4-14, Army Regulation 600-20, dated 7 June 2006, by borrowing money in the amount of $412.05 from PFC X., which was in violation of Article 92, UCMJ on 3 May 2007; Violating a lawful general regulation, to wit; paragraph 4-14, Army Regulation 600-20, dated 7 June 2006, by borrowing money in the amount of $400 from PFC X., which was in violation of Article 92, UCMJ 4 May 2007; Being indebted to PFC X., in the sum of $421.05 for a personal loan, which amount came due and payable on or about 15 May 2007, did, at or near Fort Lewis, WA, for 3 May 2007 to 7 November 2007, dishonorably failed to pay said debt, which was in violation of Article 134, UCMJ; and Being indebted to PFC X., in the sum of $400 for a personal loan, which amount came due and payable on or about 15 May 2007, did, at or near Fort Lewis, WA, for 4 May 2007 to 7 November 2007, dishonorably failed to pay said debt, which was in violation of Article 134, UCMJ (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: 18 April 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 May 2008 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 29 October 2002 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / GED / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B10, Infantryman / 7 years, 6 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 26 October 2000 to 28 October 2002 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 January 2003 to 17 July 2003 and 5 December 2005 to 21 November 2006) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-3, AGCM, NDSM, AFEM, GWOTEM, ICM- 4BSS, GW3OTSM, NOPDR, ASR, OSR, CIB, OSB-3 g. Performance Ratings: February 2005 to January 2006, Fully Capable 1 February 2006 to 31 January 2007, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG, 27 November 2007, by violating a lawful general regulation, to wit; paragraph 4-14, Army Regulation 600-20, dated 7 June 2006, by borrowing money in the amount of $412.05 from PFC X, which was in violation of Article 92, UCMJ on 3 May 2007; violating a lawful general regulation, to wit; paragraph 4-14, Army Regulation 600-20, dated 7 June 2006, by borrowing money in the amount of $400 from PFC X., which was in violation of Article 92, UCMJ 4 May 2007; being indebted to PFC X, in the sum of $421.05 for a personal loan, which amount came due and payable on or about 15 May 2007, did, at or near Fort Lewis, WA, for 3 May 2007 to 7 November 2007, dishonorably failed to pay said debt, which was in violation of Article 134, UCMJ; and being indebted to PFC X., in the sum of $400 for a personal loan, which amount came due and payable on or about 15 May 2007, did, at or near Fort Lewis, WA, for 4 May 2007 to 7 November 2007, dishonorably failed to pay said debt, which was in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-4, forfeiture of 1,031, restriction for 45 days, and extra duty for 45 days (suspended). Counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 5 December 2007, shows the applicant was evaluated. It was noted that the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in this evaluation. The applicant did not meet medical retention standards IAW Chapter 3, AR 40-501 as he had been treated by both psychology and psychiatry for mental health issues. It was noted that he would need to be cleared by psychiatry for the processing of a Chapter 13. Also that the provider had submitted a consult to psychiatry to schedule him for this appointment. Report of Mental Status evaluation, dated 2 January 2008, shows the applicant was command directed for evaluation because administrative separation was being considered under AR 635- 200, Chapter 13. It was noted at the time of evaluation the applicant had no clinical evidence of a significant mental illness. He did have clinical evidence for mood and anxiety-spectrum symptoms that warrant treatment, but those symptoms were not causative to the duty performance leading to the chapter 13 action. He did not fail medical retention standard per AR 40-501, chapter 3-32 or 33. He was medically (psychiatrically) fit for full, unrestricted duty. He did not require assessment by a medical evaluation board. It was also noted that the applicant's medical condition was not the direct or substantial contributing cause of the performance problems that led to the recommendation for administrative elimination; there was no clinical evidence that he lacked the capacity to appreciate the nature and the quality and the wrongfulness of the behavior that led to the chapter action; there was no clinical evidence to suggest that he did not have the capacity to understand the nature of the administrative action he faced. The applicant was competent (as defined by R.C.M. 909 (e) (2)) to understand and participate in any administrative process deemed appropriated by his command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; NCO Evaluation Report; orders for the Presidential Unit Citation; enlisted record brief; letter to commanding officer at the time of discharge requesting honorable discharge; medical document indicating issues with PTSD, depression, and numerous other issues. 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 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (serious offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service 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 a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment 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 characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors 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. Caution shall be exercised 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 and a change to his narrative reason for discharge to hardship / disability. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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 on Active duty. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635- 200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ." 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 appropriate RE code is 3. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant seeks relief contending that he believes his characterization and narrative reason for discharge are inaccurate as they are based on one incident in seven and a half years of nothing but honorable service. He contends that prior to this one mistake he had three deployments. After his second deployment (1st to Iraq) he fell to PTSD and severe depression and a back injury was worsening. After regaining himself he deployed to Iraq again in 2005- 2006, during mid tour leave he lost his mother and his wife was hospitalized. This slowed him down a bit but he returned to his unit and completed his tour of duty. He made a poor decision, but believes it should not over shadow the sacrifices he made to his country. He is not looking for some special award or anything, he is just looking for what he believes to be accurate and believe an honorable discharge with a hardship or disability narrative would be accurate. He contends that he was not perfect and will not say that he was not wrong for what he did, but believes he served his country and brothers with honor, pride, selfless service, integrity, and dedication. 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 and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishment. However, the service record indicates the applicant committed multiple discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of a noncommissioned officer in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that prior to the mistakes he made resulting in his discharge he had three deployments. After his second deployment (1st to Iraq) he fell to PTSD and severe depression and a back injury was worsening. After regaining himself he deployed to Iraq again in 2005-2006, during mid tour leave he lost his mother and his wife was hospitalized. Evidence in the record shows that on 2 January 2008 the applicant underwent a Mental Status Evaluation, which showed he was command directed for evaluation because administrative separation was being considered under AR 635-200, Chapter 13. It was noted at the time of evaluation the applicant had no clinical evidence of a significant mental illness. He did have clinical evidence for mood and anxiety-spectrum symptoms that warrant treatment, but those symptoms were not causative to the duty performance leading to the chapter 13 action. He did not fail medical retention standard per AR 40-501, chapter 3-32 or 33. He was medically (psychiatrically) fit for full, unrestricted duty. He did not require assessment by a medical evaluation board. It was also noted that the applicant's medical condition was not the direct or substantial contributing cause of the performance problems that led to the recommendation for administrative elimination; there was no clinical evidence that he lacked the capacity to appreciate the nature and the quality and the wrongfulness of the behavior that led to the chapter action; there was no clinical evidence to suggest that he did not have the capacity to understand the nature of the administrative action he faced. The applicant was competent (as defined by R.C.M. 909 (e) (2)) to understand and participate in any administrative process deemed appropriated by his command. Medical documents submitted by the applicant and those contained in the records were noted; however, It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that although he was suffering from PTSD and other medical issues, he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. Further, there are many Soldiers with the same condition that completed their service successfully. It should be noted; by regulation, an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct (serious offense). It appears the applicant's generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge. 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 13 July 2018, 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 Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code 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 AR20170003059 1