IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 February 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220003403 APPLICANT REQUESTS: Upgrade of his under honorable conditions (general) discharge and a different, presumably more favorable, narrative reason for separation. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge) * HealtheVet medical summary FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), Section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his discharge should be upgraded because he suffered from an undiagnosed condition of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and memory difficulties at the time of his misconduct. 3. On 8 June 2004, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years and 23 weeks. Upon completion of training, he was assigned to a unit at Fort Carson, CO. 4. DA Forms 4856 (Developmental Counseling Form) show the applicant was formally counseled on the following dates, for the reasons shown. He was repeatedly advised that continued conduct of this nature could result in disciplinary action under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and/or administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel). * 13 April 2005 - failing to pay a debt * 15 April 2005 - financial plan and budget record initiated * 28 April 2005 - lying to a noncommissioned officer (NCO) * 5 May 2005 - failing to meet Army uniform standards * 22 July 2005 - failing to obey an order or regulation and absence without leave (AWOL) * 21 April 2006 - failing a diagnostic Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) * 15 May 2006 - failing to report at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty * 17 May 2006 - failing to follow an order from an NCO * 21 May 2006 - lying to an NCO 5. On 22 June 2006, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ for seven offenses. a. His offenses were as follows, on or about the dates shown: * 22 July 2005, 15 May 2006, 16 May 2006, and 29 May 2006 - without authority, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty * 16 May 2006 and 29 May 2006 - willfully disobeying a lawful order from an NCO * 29 May 2006 - being disrespectful in language toward an NCO b. His punishment consisted of reduction from the rank/grade of private first class (PFC)/E-3 to private (PV2)/E-2 (suspended, to be automatically remitted if not sooner vacated by 22 December 200), forfeiture of $356.00 (suspended), and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. 6. DA Forms 4856 show the applicant was formally counseled on the following dates, for the following: * 8 July 2006 - failing an APFT * 19 July 2006 - failing an APFT * 1 August 2006 - failing to comply with Army uniform standards 7. On 20 August 2006, the suspended portions of the applicant's NJP under the provisions of Article 15, of the UCMJ on 22 June 2006 were vacated. The reason for this action was the applicant's failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 16 August 2006. 8. DA Forms 4856 show the applicant was formally counseled on the following dates, for the following: * 6 December 2006 - failing to go to his appointed place of duty * 20 March 2007 - falling asleep during training * 20 March 2007 - failing to obey an order from an NCO * 26 March 2007 - failing to complete a 5000 word essay to satisfaction * 11 April 2007 - failing to follow an order from an NCO and missing accountability formation * 30 August 2007 - falling asleep during training * 5 September 2007 - failing to conduct personal hygiene * 4 October 2007 - failing to have assigned documents for inspection * 15 October 2007 - falling asleep at his assigned post 9. On 1 October 2007, the applicant was advanced to the rank/grade of PFC/E-3. 10. On 16 October 2007, the applicant accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15, of the UCMJ for with intent to deceive, making a false official statement to an NCO. His punishment consisted of reduction from PFC/E-3 to PV2/E-2, forfeiture of $340.00, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. 11. On 18 October 2007, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation to determine whether he was a suitable candidate for administrative separation. The examining psychiatrist determined the applicant: * was mentally responsible for his behavior * possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings * displayed no evidence of an emotional or mental disorder of psychiatric significance to warrant disposition through medical channels * was psychiatrically cleared for an administrative action as deemed appropriate by command 12. The applicant underwent a pre-separation medical examination on 29 October 2007. a. His DD Form 2807-1 shows he self-reported experiencing, in part: * memory loss since leaving Iraq * two seizures while serving in Iraq during March and April 2006 * anxiety and panic attacks * habitual stammering or stuttering when he gets nervous * receiving counseling for mental health * feeling depressed * being treated in an emergency room more times than he could recall b. His DD Form 2697 shows he reported his overall health had declined since his last medical assessment/physical examination. He had experienced seizures, depression, panic attacks and was pending surgery on his right shoulder. c. His DD Form 2808 shows the examining physician determined he was medically qualified for service and/or administrative separation. 13. The applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate actions to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for patterns of misconduct. The specific reasons for this action were the applicant's dereliction of duty on numerous occasions, failing to report to his place of duty on numerous occasions, and failure to obey lawful orders on several occasions. He advised the applicant he was recommending that he receive an Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification. 14. The applicant consulted with counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated actions to separate him and its effects, of the rights available to him, and the effect of any action taken by him to waive his rights. He requested representation by counsel and elected to submit statements in his own behalf. The available record is void of a statement. 15. The applicant's immediate commander formally recommended his separation prior to the expiration of his term of service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, by reason of patterns of misconduct. 16. On 6 December 2007, the separation authority approved the recommended discharge action and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. 17. Orders and the applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) show he was discharged on 3 January 2008. His DD Form 214 shows, in: (1) block 12 (Record of Service) – He completed 3 years, 6 months, and 26 days of net active service this period. (2) block 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign awarded or authorized) – He was awarded or authorized the Army Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Iraq Campaign Medal, Army Service Ribbon, and Overseas Service Ribbon. (3) block 18 (Remarks) – He did not complete his first full term of service. (4) block 24 (Character of Service) - His characterization of service was Under honorable Conditions (General). (5) block 25 (Separation Authority) - The authority for his separation was Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b. (6) block 26 (Separation Code) - His Separation Program Designator Code was "JKA." (7) block 27 (Reentry Code) - His Reentry Eligibility (RE) Code was "3." (8) block 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) - The narrative reason for his separation was "Pattern of Misconduct." 18. The applicant's record is void of evidence and he has not provided any evidence which shows he was diagnosed with PTSD or any other medical or behavioral health condition during this period of service. 19. The applicant provides a "My HealtheVet" personal information report, printed on 7 February 2022. This summary may include information that was self-reported, information from his Department of Veterans Affairs health record, and military service record. It shows the applicant was determined to suffer from generalized anxiety disorder, PTSD, and traumatic brain injury (TBI). 20. Clemency guidance to the Boards for Correction of Military/Navy Records (BCM/NR) does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority to ensure each case will be assessed on its own merits. In determining whether to grant relief BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. This includes consideration of changes in policy, whereby a service member under the same circumstances today would reasonably be expected to receive a more favorable outcome. 21. Published guidance to the BCM/NRs clearly indicates that the guidance is not intended to interfere or impede on the Board's statutory independence. The Board will determine the relative weight of the action that led to the discharge and whether it supports relief or not. In reaching its determination, the Board shall consider the applicant's petition, available records and/or submitted documents in support of the petition. 22. MEDICAL REVIEW: a. The applicant is applying to the ABCMR requesting an upgrade of his under honorable conditions (general) discharge and a different narrative reason for separation. b. The specific facts and circumstances of the case can be found in the ABCMR Record of Proceedings (ROP). Pertinent to this advisory are the following: (1) Applicant asserts undiagnosed PTSD and memory difficulties at time of his misconduct. (2) He enlisted into the RA on 8 June 2004. (3) Records show he was counseled for the following issues on the following dates: failing to pay a debt (13 April 2005); financial plan and budget record initiated (15 April 2005); lying to an NCO (28 April 2005); failing to meet Army uniform standards (5 May 2005); failing to obey an order or regulation and AWOL (22 July 2005); failing diagnostic APFT (21 April 2006); failure to report at the prescribed time and place (15 May 2006); failing to follow an order from an NCO (17 May 2006); lying to an NCO (21 May 2006). (4) On 22 June 2006 he accepted NJP for seven offenses: without authority failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (22 July 2005; 15 May 2006; 16 May 2006; and 29 May 2006); willfully disobeying a lawful order from NCO (16 May 2006 and 29 May 2006); and being disrespectful in language toward an NCO (29 May 2006). (5) He was formally counseled for APFT failure (8 July 2006 and 19 July 2006) and failing to comply with Army uniform standards (1 August 2006). (6) Additional records show he was again formally counseled for failure to go to additional place of duty (6 December 2006); falling asleep during training (20 March 2007); failing to obey an order from an NCO (20 March 2007); failure to complete a 5000 word essay to satisfaction (26 March 2007); failing to follow an order form an NCO and missing formation (11 April 2007); falling asleep during training (30 August 2007); failing to conduct personal hygiene (5 September 2007); failing to have assigned documents for inspection (4 October 2007); falling asleep at assigned post (15 October 2007). (7) On 16 October 2007, he accepted NJP for with intent to deceive, making a false official statement to an NCO. (8) On 18 October 2007 he underwent a mental status evaluation and was found mentally responsible for behavior, displayed no evidence of a mental disorder significant enough to warrant medical disposition, and was cleared for administrative action. (9) He underwent a pre-separation medical examination on 29 October 2007; his various self-reports are noted in the ROP and include memory loss since leaving Iraq, multiple seizures in Iraq during March and April 2006, anxiety and panic attacks, receiving mental health counseling, feeling depressed, and multiple ER visits. He was deemed medically qualified for service and/or administrative separation. (10) His immediate commander notified applicant of intent to separate via AR 635- 200 Chapter 14 (patterns of misconduct) due to dereliction of duty on numerous occasions, failing to report to his place of duty on numerous occasions, and failure to obey lawful orders on several occasions. (11) Applicant was ultimately discharged on 3 January 2008; DD214 shows discharge under AR 635-200 paragraph 14-12b (patterns of misconduct), under honorable conditions (general). c. Supporting Documents All supporting documents reviewed. Lack of citation or discussion in this section should not be interpreted as lack of consideration. Applicant asserts PTSD and “memory problems” associated with his request. Compensation and Pension Evaluation dated 28 September 2015 reflects diagnoses of PTSD, previously diagnosed and service connected as Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Moderate. Evaluation indicates he was medevac’d to Germany from Iraq for seizures April 2006 but was RTD. Now complains of memory problems. He also asserts, in essence, poor command climate. His numerous counseling statements and other disciplinary records were reviewed and appreciated. Of note is documentation of 16 October 2007, in which applicant made a false statement with intent to deceive to SFC regarding his whereabouts when he was going to work a second job, which was prohibited without approval. Mental Status Evaluation of 18 October 2007 reviewed, was summarized in ROP. Report of Medical History dated 29 October 2007 indicates numerous self-reported concerns to include anxiety/panic attacks, stammering/stuttering, loss of memory/amnesia, history of counseling, depression, and excessive worry. He also described “memory problems ever since Iraq.” He references ER evaluations “more times than I can count” but does not elaborate. Report of Medical Assessment dated 29 October 2007 references memory difficulties since OIF deployment and treatment for mental health concerns to include anxiety/panic attacks and depression. Per associated Report of Medical Examination, he was found fit for duty/qualified for chapter separation. Memorandum dated 6 November 2007 outlines applicant’s work performance prior to deployment to Iraq (November 2005-2006). Of particular interest is a history, prior to deployment, which indicates he “consistently failed to maintain the standards that were set forth, resulting in him being late for numerous accountability formations, failing to follow orders, and failing to meet the standards set forth in Army Regulations.” During deployment “on numerous occasions he was caught lying to his NCOs, failed to be at his appointed place of duty, and failed to maintain uniform standard.” His work performance following deployment was deemed substandard and is noteworthy for “making false official statements.” Applicant’s DD214 shows service in Iraq 30 November 2005 to 30 October 2006. d. AHLTA The Army electronic medical record, AHLTA, was reviewed. Problem list/diagnostic history relevant to the opine includes personality disorder; adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood; anxiety disorder not otherwise specified; marital problem; occupational problem; adjustment disorder with anxious mood; adjustment disorder with depressed mood; interpersonal relationship problems; adjustment disorder; conversion disorder; epilepsy and recurrent seizures; convulsive disorder; depression; relational problems; seizure disorder, generalized convulsive grand mal; seizure disorder partial complex psychomotor. His AHLTA records are void of any relevant contacts prior to his deployment. A 7 March Theater note includes diagnoses of seizure disorder partial complex psychomotor, but no data was returned. On 15 March 2006 he was seen for follow up from seizure approx. 1 week prior, at which time he was sent to Balad for further care, “patient was diagnosed with seizure activity that was felt secondary to stress and exhaustion. He had a CT scan which was normal.” He was seen again on 1 April 2006 for convulsions and apparently medevac’d to Landstuhl where he was diagnosed with convulsive disorder and presyncope syndrome (in addition to cellulitis of left arm). Note of 7 April 2006 indicates normal EEG and MRI. He was RTD back to theater. He was evaluated by a physician on 5 July 2006, still in theater, and diagnosed with adjustment disorder secondary to multiple administrative and disciplinary actions pending; “after discussion with combat stress team at Warhorse…patient will be medevac’d as routine to LSAA for further mental health evaluation and acute stress management.” Finally, he was evaluated on 15 July 2006 for clearance for ammo/weapons after he made threatening statements indicating possible homicidal thoughts; he was diagnosed with adjustment disorder and conversion disorder. He was referred for anger management but there are no records of potential attendance. Upon return CONUS he was evaluated at Fort Carson on 8 November 2006, diagnosed with convulsive disorder, and it was noted he “received smallpox vaccination shortly before these episodes. There is some know association w/postvaccinial encaphalopathy and seizures, but Pt had no other apparent signs/symptoms at the time besides extreme fatigue. No evidende of endocarditis. Pt's later difficulties w/Adjustment d/o also raise the question of whether this could have been coversion d/o or pseudoseizures, but not enough evidence to r/o other causes.” (direct quote from records, with errors as written). On same date he was evaluated by a physician who noted his poor hygiene, apparent depressed mood, and referenced treatment for depression while in theater. He was evaluated by a social worker on 19 March 2007 due to stress associated with financial concerns and apparently spousal infidelity while deployed. During his PDHRA BH evaluation on 21 March 2007 he endorsed anxiety, irritability, lack of sleep, feeling disconnected, and concerns about family relationships. He was evaluated by psychiatrist on 21 March 2007 and diagnosed with anxiety disorder not otherwise specified, as well as martial and occupational problems, and started on medication. At follow-up on 2 May 2007 psychiatrist noted “recurrent adjustment issues with possible somatic overtones” and referenced applicant had threatened to kill platoon sergeant in Iraq. The physician also noted “much of current stress is situational due to the SM’s attitude about no longer wanting to be a soldier.” Entry by psychologist on 1 November 2007 indicates he was cleared for chapter separation and disposition through medical channels was not warranted. He continued psychiatric contacts in November and December 2007 prior to his discharge, with last contact on 6 December 2007 resulting in diagnoses of anxiety disorder not otherwise specified and personality disorder. e. JLV Available VA records were reviewed via JLV. Records indicate applicant has a service connection for PTSD (50%) and is 80% SC overall. There are no service connections listed for TBI or any seizure-related disorder. His VA medical record is extensive and will not be summarized in its entirety. His service connection for PTSD is appreciated and sufficient to establish nexus between deployment to Iraq and the diagnosis of PTSD. There are limited psychiatric records over the last several years; last clear evidence of psychiatric contact appears to be November 2016 for diagnosis of PTSD (although this does not preclude the possibility of non-VA care). MHC Consultation note of 26 October 2015 resulted in diagnoses of major depression and PTSD. C&P Exam of 28 September 2015 summarized above in supporting documents and references a history of diagnosed TBI (specifics unclear although reports vehicle hit by IED). Neurology/polytrauma Consult dated 12 February 2014 referenced a fall in 2006, while setting up fighting positions, in which he hit his head. “He states that he has experienced headaches ever since that time.” During the evaluation he described cognitive difficulty and failure to recall certain activities or behaviors. The evaluation concluded, in part, “worsening symptoms including violent outbursts may be more associated with PTSD and lack of sleep.” There is also evidence of homelessness/adequate housing concerns and receiving housing support through the HUD/VASH program. ? f. Other Query of HAIMS did not return any documents for this applicant. Kurta Questions: 1. Does any evidence state that the applicant had a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate a discharge? Yes. The applicant asserts PTSD and memory problems associated with the circumstances of his discharge, and records indicate he is 50% service connected for PTSD. 2. Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant’s assertion is supported by his service connection for PTSD and ample evidence of anxiety and mood concerns while on Active Duty, which records indicate started during and continued to manifest after his deployment. 3. Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partial. The applicant asserts mitigation due to PTSD and “memory problems” at the time of his offenses/discharge, and he has been awarded 50% VA service connection for PTSD. PTSD was diagnosed associated with his combat deployment to Iraq from 30 November 2005 to 30 October 2006. During his deployment he had convulsive/seizure-like activity for which he was medevac’d from theater, although he RTD and appears to have completed his deployment. Under liberal consideration, it is reasonable to attribute his deployment and post-deployment memory problems to potential residuals of possible convulsive episodes and reported hx of TBI, as well as distractibility and poor attention/concentration often associated with the natural history of PTSD, anxiety and depression. The latter is more likely from a clinical standpoint given the typical history and course of PTSD, mild TBI, and his seizure-like history. This applicant has a noteworthy disciplinary record prior to his deployment, and therefore PTSD and memory concerns would not mitigate disciplinary actions prior to his deployment. PTSD and associated concerns would mitigate certain violations during and following his deployment (liberally estimated as the start date of deployment, given lack of clear dates of index events leading to PTSD). Mitigation would apply to offenses after 30 November 2005 associated with avoidance symptoms in include AWOL/failure to report; offenses associated with low motivation and poor self-care to include APFT failures and poor personal hygiene; offenses associated with distractibility and forgetfulness to include failure to complete an essay or having documents in possession; and sleep-related issues such as falling asleep during training and at his post. As irritability is also part of the natural course of PTSD, offenses associated with verbal disrespect to others would be mitigated. However, PTSD does not impair one’s ability to differentiate between right and wrong and adhere to the right and does not mitigate charges associated with lying and the charge of making a false official statement with intent to deceive. In summary, given the applicant’s disciplinary history over time, it is the advisor’s opinion that the evidence of mitigation does not outweigh the overall chronology, history, and nature of his offenses; his discharge (under honorable conditions, general) appears proper and equitable. BOARD DISCUSSION: The Board carefully considered the applicant's request, supporting documents, evidence in the records, a medical review, and published Department of Defense guidance for liberal consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant's statement, his record of service to include deployment, the frequency and nature of his misconduct, and the reason for his separation. The Board considered the applicant's PTSD claim and the review and conclusions of the ARBA Medical Advisor. The applicant provided no evidence of post-service achievements or letters of reference in support of a clemency determination. The Board found insufficient evidence of in-service mitigating factors and concurred with the conclusion of the medical advising official regarding his misconduct not being fully mitigated by PTSD. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined the character of service the applicant received upon separation and the reason for his separation were not in error or unjust. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION ? BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Title 10, USC, Section 1556 provides the Secretary of the Army shall ensure that an applicant seeking corrective action by the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) is provided a copy of all correspondence and communications, including summaries of verbal communications, with any agencies or persons external to agency or board, or a member of the staff of the agency or Board, that directly pertains to or has material effect on the applicant's case, except as authorized by statute. 3. Army Regulation 15-185 prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. It is not an investigative body. The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing. Applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. 4. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. b. Paragraph 3-7b states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions (a pattern of misconduct consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions), a pattern of misconduct (consisting of discreditable involvement with civil or military authorities or conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline). Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter; however, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if merited by the Soldier’s overall record. 5. Army Regulation 635-5-1 provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the separation codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It states that the separation code "JKA" is an appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, by reason of a Pattern of Misconduct. Additionally, the SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table established that RE code "3" was the proper reentry code to assign to Soldiers separated under this authority and for this reason. 6. On 3?September 2014, the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service BCM/NRs to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged UOTHC and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider in order to determine if it would be appropriate to upgrade the characterization of the applicant's service. 7. On 25?August 2017, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued clarifying guidance for the Secretary of Defense Directive to DRBs and BCM/NRs when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharges due in whole or in part to: mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Boards are to give liberal consideration to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part to those conditions or experiences. The guidance further describes evidence sources and criteria and requires Boards to consider the conditions or experiences presented in evidence as potential mitigation for misconduct that led to the discharge. 8. On 25?July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military DRBs and BCM/NRs regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court- martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220003403 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1