1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 October 2018 b. Date Received: 9 October 2018 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant, through counsel, requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, a narrative reason change and a reentry eligibility (RE) code change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant is entitled to the requested relief for the following reasons: The allegations contained in the negative counseling statements included in the separation packet were untrue and were, therefore, issued erroneously. The applicant was, in fact, not guilty of all of the allegations made against the applicant in the Article 15 for the following reasons: the government lacked sufficient evidence to demonstrate the applicant was guilty of violating Articles 86, 92, and 107, UCMJ by a preponderance of the evidence. The government's case was deficient both as a matter of law and as a matter of fact. The applicant was subjected to unfair and, at times, cruel treatment by members of the chain of command. This treatment not only caused the applicant lasting psychological damage, but also contributed to the conditions that led to the applicant's negative counseling's and Article 15, all of which were used to support the separation action in question. The applicant filed an Inspector General (IG) complaint based on several of these issues. In part, the applicant was never paid for language pay (Bengali and Hindi), to which the applicant was entitled. The applicant's performance and character, as evidenced in the OMPF and the letters of support submitted by colleagues strongly indicate that the applicant should have been retained, notwithstanding the allegations. The applicant's overall performance and character demonstrates that the applicant should have received an honorable characterization of service. 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 Occupational Problem. The applicant is 100% service-connected for Schizoaffective Disorder from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Delusional Disorder. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 March 2020, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnosis of OBHI), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: The applicant's separation packet is void from the service record. The information below is derived from separation documents provided by the applicant. a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unsatisfactory Performance / AR 635- 200 / Chapter 13 / JHJ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 25 March 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 6 March 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: he had shown a lack of professionalism, respect, and responsibility required of a Soldier serving in the United States Army. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 13 March 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 17 March 2014 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 April 2013 / 4 years, 24 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 91D10, Power-Generation Equipment Repairer / 11 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 28 February 2014, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on two occasions (2 January 2014); for being derelict in the performance of his duties (1 January 2014); and, for making a false official statement that he was stuck Walden , Colorado (1 January 2014). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; and, extra duty and restriction for 7 days. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 11 February 2014, reflects the applicant was treated for chronic: Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; DD Form 293 with allied legal brief and all listed enclosures; DD Form 214. 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 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases. 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 "JHJ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, unsatisfactory performance. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JHJ" 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, through counsel, requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, a narrative reason change and a reentry eligibility (RE) code change. The applicant's record of service, 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. 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 contends he merits an upgrade, because the applicant was not found guilty of the allegations against him in an Article 15. The applicant also contends he was not paid for his language pay. However, the validity of the allegations in Article 15 proceedings and matters regarding language pay, do not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant 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 applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions). The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance," and the separation code is "JHJ." 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 regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends that he was subjected to unfair and cruel treatment by members of his chain of command. The applicant provides a IG complaint to support his contention. Also, the applicant contends allegations contained in his negative counseling statements were untrue and issued erroneously. However, 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. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. Accordingly, these arguments are not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant requests an RE code change. 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 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The applicant contends that he had good service. 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. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's character. They all recognize his good conduct while in the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): Character Letters - 8 Pages Military Documents - 2 Pages Welcome Letter - 2 Pages b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): Applicant and counsel provided oral arguments in support of the contentions they provided in their written submissions and in support of their documentary evidence c. Counsel / Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 March 2020, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnosis of OBHI), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 AR20180013127 5