1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 June 2017 b. Date Received: 22 June 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests to change the narrative reason and its corresponding codes of discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, at the time of discharge, the MOS was overstaffed and the military began to downsize and limited reenlistments. The reentry code of 3 disqualifies the applicant from reenlisting for Active. The applicant was given an option to serve the remainder of the contract, but not the option to reenlist. During a second combat tour to Iraq, the applicant was involved in an argument with the platoon sergeant over actions taken after a roadside bomb. While transitioning from Iraq, the unit remained in Kuwait for four months during close- out, in case of returning to Iraq. As a field artilleryman and while in Kuwait, there was a best of the best competition within the battalion and upon leading in every category, and being guilty of not waiting a full 90 seconds before giving a Soldier the command to fire, the applicant was relieved of command as a section chief. The applicant did not argue the consequence; however, the applicant was then ridiculed and made fun of, and yelled at by the battalion master gunner who relieved the applicant. The master gunner, who was also the platoon sergeant in Iraq, was embarrassed because the applicant called the NCO out for being "captain America." The master gunner's words, actions, and comments that followed were completely uncalled for and very unprofessional. The applicant simply responded that had the applicant not been winning the competition and had been a Mason such as the master gunner, the argument would have never occurred. During deployment, the applicant and other Soldiers were always victimized with jokes and low-end remarks because they were not affiliated with any mason group. After telling the master gunner that it was unnecessary and unfair to Soldiers, who busted their behind, blood, sweat and tears, and who had fought to earn their rank and position as opposed to the others who were just affiliated with a certain group to achieve success and gain rewards for it, the applicant was told one's career was "f-----g done, son" and that the applicant would never be a Soldier again. Upon being threatened, the applicant sought assistance from the next level supervisor, who at the time was the mason leader. The applicant was told to shut up and given an ultimatum, that the applicant could accept the 4/4 rating on a "relief for cause" NCOER or accept an Article 15 for slander because the applicant called the platoon leader out for being a mason and having a grudge. The applicant accepted the bad NCOER, which was the reason the applicant was selected for non-retention resulting from a bad leadership. Although the applicant agrees for being wrong, the applicant does not agree with all the actions that followed and a career being ruined forever. The applicant was a very good NCO and among the best within the entire Brigade. The applicant was wronged and simply wants to reenlist on Active Duty to continue with training, leading, and mentoring Soldiers to be the best. The applicant exhausted all waivers and options upon transitioning out of the Army, was left with no option but to accept this fate. As a civilian for three years, the applicant cannot find work. A Congresswoman pointed the applicant to the board of appeals/corrections-the applicant has no other options. Changing the reentry to a "1" would allow the applicant to return to active duty. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder with depressed mood and anxiety and Concussion. The applicant is 70% service-connected for PTSD from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Major Depressive Disorder. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 September 2019, 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: Non-Retention on Active Duty / AR 635-200, Chapter 4 / JGH / RE-3 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 1 March 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The actual basis for the applicant to be considered for denial of continued active duty service under the Qualitative Management Program is NIF. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NA / Honorable 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 November 2006 / 6 years, 4 weeks (any reenlistment(s) after this period is NIF) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 88 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 13B30, Cannon Crewmember / 8 years, 3 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None or NIF / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (3 February 2009 to 23 January 2010), (7 July 2011 to 31 December 2011), Kuwait (1 January 2012 to 26 June 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2; AAM-2; AGCM-2; NDSM; ICM-2CS; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; NCOPDR; ASR; OSR; CAB; MUC g. Performance Ratings: Four NCOERs: 1 November 2010 thru 31 October 2011, Fully Capable 30 November 2011 thru 15 May 2012, RFC, Marginal 16 May 2012 thru 8 October 2012, Fully Capable 9 October 2012 thru 8 October 2013, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Discharge Orders i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application. 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 19 covers discharges caused by the qualitative screening by the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) for NCOs (SSG through CSM/SGM) whose performance, conduct, and/or potential for advancement do not meet Army standards, as determined by the approved recommendations of HQDA centralized selection boards responsible for QMP screening will be denied continued service. The QMP is designed to enhance the quality of the career enlisted force, selectively retain the best qualified Soldiers, deny continued service to nonproductive Soldiers, and encourage Soldiers to maintain their eligibility for further service. Section III, provides Soldier notification and option provisions, and its process. Paragraph 19-11 states, in pertinent part, that Soldiers denied continued service under QMP may appeal the determination and request retention on active duty on the basis of improved performance and/or presence of material error in the Soldier's record when reviewed by the selection board. Successful appeals result in removal of the denial of continued service determination. Army policy states the service of Soldier separated under this chapter will be characterized as honorable. 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 "JGH" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 19-12, Non-Retention on Active Duty. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JGH" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests to change the narrative reason of his discharge and its corresponding codes. The applicant's available record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of documentary evidence 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 4, by reason of "Non-Retention on Active Duty," with an honorable characterization of service. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been 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 separation file that includes the notification memorandum in which a Qualitative Management Program (QMP) Selection Board would have provided a recommendation for denial of continued active duty service) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because the complete information on the bases for his discharge are not available in the official record. 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 AR 635-200, paragraph 19-12, is "Non-Retention on Active Duty" and the separation code is JGH. 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 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 4. An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 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 6 September 2019, 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 AR20170009769 1