1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 March 2018 b. Date Received: 30 March 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he returned "from war" in May 2003, after living in Kuwait under hostile environment. He was discharged after committing a crime. He served six months in jail and received ten years of probation by a jury. He paid over 10,000 dollars of fines, completed over 500 hours of community service, and submitted over 100 urine tests and never failed one test. On 22 November 2012, he received an early release from his probation sentence due to his good conduct and finishing all his debts. In January 2013, he graduated from a 10- month class and received his HVAC-R certification. He has since been employed but was forced to leave his last two employments because of his under-performance and his current marriage being in jeopardy. He has since been diagnosed with PTSD and he is unemployed. He regrets every moment of his past conduct, but also attributes it to being troubled after returning from war. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. However, due to the nature of the misconduct, neither condition mitigates the offense of armed robbery. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 September 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, and 28, contain erroneous entries. In view of the erroneous entries, the Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, and c. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(1) / JKD / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 March 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 12 February 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 30 December 2003, he was arrested by a police department for armed robbery. In lieu of his actions, rehabilitation is impracticable and further effort is unlikely to succeed. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 February 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 February 2004 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 February 2002 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 14T10, Patriot Missile Crewmember / 1 year, 10 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / NIF f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 31 December 2003, reflects that the applicant's duty status changed from PDY to Confinement by Civil Authorities, effective 30 December 2003. Negative counseling statements for being arrested by a police department for armed robbery and separation action being initiated. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 65 days (Confined by civil authorities on 30 December 2003 through 3 March 2004, the date of his discharge) / remained incarcerated j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant's documentary evidence: VA Review Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Disability Benefits Questionnaire, dated 7 March 2018, noted listing "Diagnoses 1" as PTSD, and "2" as "Generalized Anxiety D/O." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 27 March 2018, with applicant's self-authored statement; letter, dated 21 November 2002; Certificate of Achievement for OIF; DD Form 214; VA Review Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Disability Benefits Questionnaire, dated 7 March 2018; District Court, three separate Orders Granting Early Discharge of Probation, dated 21 November 2012; HVAC/R R-410A certificate; and three separate VA "Statements in Support of Claim." 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, he had an early release from his probation, and has since graduated from a 10-month class and received his HVAC-R certification. 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(1) applies to absentee who had returned to military control from a status of absent without leave or desertion to be separated for commission of a serious offense. 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 "JKD" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), Misconduct (AWOL). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKD" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. However, it also 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), and 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. 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. 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. 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 serious incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service. The service record further reflects that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as "AR 635-200, Paragraph 14- 12c(1)," block 26 as "JKD," and block 28 as "Misconduct." The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of misconduct (serious offense) under the provisions of AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c. Therefore, the following administrative corrections are warranted: a. block 25, separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c; b. block 26, separation code to JKQ; and c. block 28, reason for separation to Misconduct (Serious Offense). 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 performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, and his post-service accomplishments, 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. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues which involved being recently 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 may have existed as he was recently diagnosed with PTSD by VA, 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 contends he had returned in May 2003, after having served in Kuwait under hostile environment; however, his DD Form 214 does not reflect his foreign service or that he served in a designated imminent danger pay area, and in an area in Southwest Asia. A change to his DD Form 214 to reflect his OIF service does not fall within the purview of this Board. If the applicant desires to have his DD Form 214 to reflect that service, then he may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 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 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 12 September 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, and 28, contain erroneous entries. In view of the erroneous entries, the Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, and c. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Serious Offense) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKQ / 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 AR20180005126 1