1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 30 May 2017 b. Date Received: 16 June 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. The Board would consider him for a possible upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.28. 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, he disagrees with some of the charges he was found guilty of in the Article 15 and Administrative Separation Board hearings relating to inappropriate relationship with SPC H and accidental discharge of his firearm. His medical records were never reviewed to verify his PTSD and other medical issues, nor were they addressed, including two separate mental evaluations. After 17 years of active duty service and five combat deployments, he earned his retirement and an Honorable Discharge. He had numerous medical appointments to help him cope with his PTSD, Anxiety, and other mental and physical disorders. It is unfair to strip him of his retirement and benefits that he work hard for to support his family. He had an approved retirement under the TERA Act. An NCO, MSG M, of brigade S-4 took it upon himself to take his packet from S1 and hold it in his office so it would not go forward for signatures and he could not retire. Instead, he was quickly tried and extended 12 days to involuntarily separate him with nothing. He was never sent to reevaluate his medical concerns, in spite of, what two different civilian Psychiatrists had to say. He would like an upgrade and retirement if the Board has the authority to do so. He was made an example of, by a new command team and sent home with underlying issues that still need to be addressed by the US Army. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant did not have a medical or behavioral health condition. A review of military medical records indicated SM did not have any behavioral health diagnoses in AHLTA; however, SM was evaluated by a civilian provider on 30 September 2013 and diagnosed with PTSD and Depression NOS Disorder. He also has post-service diagnoses of PTSD with dissociative symptoms and an Adjustment Disorder; however, these conditions are not reasonably related to or mitigating for the misconduct leading to his early separation. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 January 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, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: c. Separation Facts: 2 September 2014 (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: According to the applicant's documentary evidence: The administrative separation board that convened on 28 May 2014, found the following bases for separation were substantiated by preponderance of evidence, that the applicant: On divers occasions between 28 December 2012 and 5 January 2013, failed to obey a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully engaging in an inappropriate relationship with SPC L. On 7 September 2013, he failed to obey an order by contacting a Family member when he was ordered not to contact her. Between 18 November 2006 and 7 January 2007, he failed to obey an order issued by CPT J, by wrongfully having a social relationship with PFC F, while in Taji, Iraq. Between 15 November 2006 and 7 January 2007, he failed to obey an order by wrongfully having a visitor of opposite gender in his living quarters. Between 18 November 2006 and 7 January 2007, he failed to obey an order issued by LTC O, by wrongfully having a social relationship with PFC F. On 13 January 2006, he wrongfully solicit SPC G and PFC Z to commit an indecent act. The board recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 February 2009 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / Bachelor of Science Degree / 107 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 92F20, Petroleum Supply Specialist / 17 years, 3 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: DEP (23 April 1997 to 19 May 1997) / NA RA (20 May 1997 to 18 August 1999) / HD RA (19 August 1999 to 20 November 2002) / HD RA (21 November 2002 to 3 February 2005) / HD RA (4 February 2005 to 8 February 2009) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (26 April 2003 to 25 October 2003), (13 May 2004 to 11 March 2005), (26 October 2006 to 10 December 2007), (27 April 2009 to 15 April 2010), Afghanistan (1 June 2011 to 28 May 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-5; AAM-3; AGCM-4; NDSM; ACM-2CS; ICM-CS; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; NCOPDR-2; OSR; NATOMDL; CAB; MUC g. Performance Ratings: Seven NCOERs rendered during period of service under current review: 1 June 2008 thru 31 May 2009, Fully Capable 1 June 2009 thru 31 May 2010, Fully Capable 31 May 2010 thru 24 February 2011, Among the Best 25 February 2011 thru 15 October 2011, Among the Best 16 October 2011 thru 31 May 2012, Among the Best 1 June 2012 thru 15 October 2012, Among the Best 16 October 2012 thru 15 October 2013, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Discharge Orders with an amendment, dated 28 August 2014 i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant's documentary evidence: Mental Health Assessment, dated 30 September 2013, reflects the applicant's "AXIS I" diagnosis as "309.81 PTSD; 310.1 Depression NOS Disorder." Initial Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Disability Benefits Questionaire, dated 3 June 2014, reflects current diagnoses as "Mental Disorder Diagnosis #1: 309.81 PTSD" with "dissociative symptoms," and "Mental Disorder Diagnosis #2: 309.28 Adjustment Disorder with depression and anxiety...due to administrative circumstances," with additional information on behavioral health issues, PTSD symptoms, and treatments. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; Memorandum for Record, dated 7 May 2014, subject: Timeline of Events; Memorandum, dated 10 June 2014, subject: Request to Abate Separation Proceedings for [the applicant]; Mental Health Assessment, dated 30 September 2013; Initial Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Disability Benefits Questionaire, dated 3 June 2014; email correspondence, dated 22 May 2014; Summary of Board Proceedings Pertaining to [the applicant], dated 28 May 2014; FG Article 15, dated 31 October 2013; Civilian County Sheriff's Office Crime/Incident Report, dated 31 August 2013; Combat Aviation Brigade Routing Tracker, dated 8 July 2013; USA Human Resources Command memorandum, dated 1 April 2013 (QMP Packet); DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 2 October 2013 (Request for Retirement under Temporary Early Authority (TERA) packet); memorandum, dated 22 November 2013, subject: 4th Combat Aviation Brigade Staff Duty Standard Operating Procedures (SOP); and memorandum for record, dated 30 December 2013, subject: Staff Duty Runner Roster for January 2014. 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 14-12c 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, paragraph 14-12c, 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 did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed, in pertinent part, by DoDI 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. Accordingly, 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 applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was digitally authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the complete discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because he disagrees with some charges he was found guilty of in an Article proceedings and in an administrative separation board hearing; insofar as having an inappropriate relationship with SPC H and an accidental discharge of his firearm; his medical records and his medical issues, such as being diagnosed with PTSD, were never considered; his 17 years of service with five combat tours; and the stripping of his retirement and benefits. 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 and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues involving being diagnosed with PTSD 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. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct found substantiated by the administrative separation board, the Board can find that his complete period of service and accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant's requested change to the narrative reason for his discharge to retirement does not fall within the purview of this Board. Further, 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 14-12c is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is JKQ. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. Based on the available 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 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 AR20170009386 2