1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 February 2017 b. Date Received: 9 March 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 to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, as a result of an attack that took place on 3 July 2013, and that he was the only medic on ground with no one to verify the condition of his stability, he received the required assessment two and one-half years later. Such has caused significant damage to the credibility of his character, the regularity of his life, and his continuance career in the US Army. Including the void of not being given the full honor of his time and contributions to the Global War on Terrorism by being honored with the prestigious Purple Heart. If the accident in 2013 never took place, his decline in health, character, and performance would have never gone any lower than excellent. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had a partially mitigating medical or behavioral health condition for the reasons leading to an early separation. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 January 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, a prior period of honorable service, and in-service and post-service diagnoses of behavioral health issues and PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by changing 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. The board determined the characterization of service was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (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: 29 April 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 November 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On divers occasions between 24 June 2015 and 30 October 2015, failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. On 10 August 2015, being disrespectful towards an NCO. On 6 August 2015, being disrespectful towards a commissioned officer. On 23 July 2015 and 17 July 2015, being derelict in his duties On 14 July 2015, failing to obey a lawful order On 13 July 2015, being found asleep while on duty. On 4 November 2014, making a false official statement to a commissioned officer. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable by the unit commander, and General (Under Honorable Conditions) by the battalion and brigade commanders (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 November 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 25 April 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (Note the GCMCA vacated the suspended initially approved separation action (suspended on 10 March 2016), including determining that the applicant's medical condition was not the direct or substantial contributing cause of the conduct that led to the recommendation for his administrative separation.) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 May 2014 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 119 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 68W10, Health Care Specialist / 4 years, 11 months, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (9 May 2011 to 9 May 2014) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (15 January 2013 to 12 September 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AGCM; NDSM; ACM-CS; GWOTSM; ASR; NATOMDL; CMB g. Performance Ratings: NA Negative counseling statements for failing to report on numerous occasions; failing to obey an order or regulation on numerous occasions; being insubordinate towards an NCO on numerous occasions; wrongful disposition of military property; communicating threats; being disrespectful towards a commissioned officer; being drunk on duty; violating good order and discipline; making a false official statement; causing reckless endangerment; being derelict in the performance of his duties; reporting lost/stolen equipment; missing several OCIE equipment; and missing appointments. FG Article 15, dated 19 December 2014, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 20 October 2014, and being found drunk on duty on 20 October 2014. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $1,017 pay per month for two months ($508 pay per month for two months suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. CG Article 15, dated 6 August 2015, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 24 June 2015. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $404 (suspended), 14 days of extra duty and restriction, and an oral reprimand. Memorandum, dated 7 April 2016, rendered by CID, indicates the applicant was reported by an anonymous source that he was affiliated with a street gang. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 27 July 2015, shows the applicant noted behavioral health issues and treatment. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 17 August 2015, reflects the applicant's "AXIS I" diagnosis of "Posttraumatic Stress Disorder." Applicant's documentary evidence: memorandum, dated 22 February 2016, rendered by a TBI Medical Director, confirms the applicant's treatment for post-concussive symptoms from operations in combat. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 21 February 2017; DD Form 214; NATO Travel Order with Orders; applicant's sworn statement with an illegible date; two sworn statements, dated 11 January 2016; Initial Evaluation of Residuals of I-TBI Disability Benefits Questionnaire; memorandum, dated 22 February 2016, subject: Purple Heart concussive injury; NATO Medal certificate; and VA healthcare enrollee service-connected card. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. 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 to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant's available 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. By the pattern of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because he received the required assessment over two years later, while there was significant damage to the credibility of his character, his life, and his continued service in the US Army, including not being awarded a PH for an attack that took place on 3 July 2013. 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 and not receiving the PH. 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 and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues which resulted from a TBI, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues along with notable service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder 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 requests to change the reason for his separation; however, the narrative reason for his separation is governed by specific directives. The narrative reason specified by AR 635- 5-1 for a discharge under Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is JKA. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. 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 31 January 2018, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, a prior period of honorable service, and in-service and post-service diagnoses of behavioral health issues and PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by changing 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. The board determined the characterization of service 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: No Change 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 AR20170003518 1