1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 August 2017 b. Date Received: 8 September 2017 c. Counsel: None d. Previous Records Review: 16 December 2015 (AR20140017868), reconsideration on the basis of behavioral health diagnoses 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests to upgrade her under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, She was self-medicating with cocaine due to 9/11. She was put in the brigade where she injured her knee, which she feels it should have been service-connected. Her discharge was inequitable, because she has since been diagnosed with bipolar, schizophrenia, and PTSD. She needed help with her condition, instead of being discharged. VA has granted her service-connection for treatment purposes only. An upgrade would allow her to receive compensation. She has learned from her mistakes. She finds it difficult to move forward because of the mistakes she made when she was young. She served her country and deserves to receive the veterans' benefits. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has no VA or DOD MH records. Civilian records document multiple conditions: Unspecified Bipolar Disorder, Mood Disorder NOS, Psychosis NOS, PTSD, Schizoaffective Disorder, Alcohol Induced Psychosis, and Substance Abuse. The applicant is treated with an antipsychotic. Considering the spectrum of the applicant's diagnosis it is highly likely, that she suffers from a severe mental health illness. These conditions are highly comorbid with substance abuse. Since, it is impossible to determine the onset of the applicant's symptoms, it is possible that she started experiencing them while in service. Therefore, this psychiatric advisor recommends consideration for an upgrade. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 April 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, an incapacity to serve, and a post-service diagnosis of predomal symptoms of OBH and PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. 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: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200 / Chapter 10 / KFS /RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 2 April 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 3 March 2004, the following charges were preferred, with recommendations to refer to trial by a special court-martial empowered to adjudge a bad conduct discharge: Charge I: six specifications of violating Article 86, UCMJ, for failing to be at her appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on six separation occasions, on 5 January 2004, 9 January 2004, 10 January 2004, 11 January 2004, 13 January 2004, and 4 February 2004. Charge II: Violation of Article 91, UCMJ, for being disrespectful in language towards an NCO on 29 December 2003. Charge III: two specifications of violating Article 107, UCMJ, for making false official statements on two separate occasions, on 8 January 2004, and 5 January 2004. Charge IV: Violation of Article 112a, UCMJ, by wrongfully using cocaine between 6 January 2004 and 16 January 2004. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 16 March 2004 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 23 March 2004 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 August 2000 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88H10, Cargo Specialist / 3 years, 8 months, 1 day d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c(1). i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant's documentary evidence: Life Management medical record, dated 14 March 2015, shows "Axis I: Clinical Disorders" diagnoses of mood disorder NOS, psychotic disorder NOS, and combination of drug dependence excluding opioid drug, unspecified; "Axis IV: Psychosocial and Environmental Problems (Stressors)" as occupational problems, mental illness. Life Management medical record, dated 13 February 2017, shows diagnoses of alcohol- induced psychotic disorder with delusions. Life Management medical record, dated 18 June 2017, shows diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, and PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), dated 14 August 2017; VA letter, dated 21 November 2016; VA Rating Decision letter, dated 17 November 2016; applicant's Statement in Support of Claim, dated 5 October 2016; Life Management medical records, 18 June 2017 (voided); Life Management medical records, dated in June 2017, February 2017, October 2016, and March 2015. 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 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. AR 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 "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial." The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "KFS" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. 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 her under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and she indicated she understood she could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. Hrecord documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that her service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant's contentions that the discharge was inequitable because since her discharge, she has been diagnosed with bipolar, schizophrenia, and PTSD, which she needed help with her condition, were carefully considered. 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 her issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that she 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. Further, the rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what she believes was an unjust discharge is not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature. The applicant's contentions regarding her behavioral health issues were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence does not indicate the applicant's behavioral health issues along with post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms existed at the time of her discharge, but the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to her misconduct. The applicant's documentary evidence shows she was granted an evaluation for her knee medical condition but for treatment purpose only. However, based on other available record and if the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to her misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. The applicant contends she served her country and deserves to receive veterans' benefits. However, eligibility for veterans' benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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 27 April 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, an incapacity to serve, and a post-service diagnosis of predomal symptoms of OBH and PTSD. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20170016827 4