1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 September 2017 b. Date Received: 20 September 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge should be upgraded based on six years of honorable service with the US Army and no UCMJ actions. The applicant was discharged for PT failure but bias from an incident relating to medication was held against the applicant. The medical board decision was not included to determine at that time the applicant was responsible these actions. The discharge being characterized as general (under honorable conditions) was unfair and the effort given over the years. The discharge packet that was signed by the Division Commander, MG W., was different from the one that the applicant signed and decided not to add any matters in the defense. 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, Other Specified Depressive Disorder, Other Problems Related to Employment, and Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). The applicant does not have any records or a service-connected rating from the VA. In summary, although the applicant had a BH diagnosis, it is not migrating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 April 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH). 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: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unsatisfactory Performance / AR 635- 200, Chapter 13 / JHJ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 November 2016 c. Separation Facts: No (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 October 2010 / 6 years, 18 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B10, Infantryman / 6 years d. Prior Service / Characterizations: N e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan x2, 15 September 2011 to 26 July 2011 and 19 January 2014 to 28 August 2014. f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, NOPDR, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NIF h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); sanity board memorandum; sleep study report; active medications; and e-mail traffic (three pages). 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. 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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the complete 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 authenticated by the applicant's digital signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13, paragraph 13, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JHJ (i.e., unsatisfactory performance), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3. The applicant seeks relief contending, his discharge should be upgraded based on that he served six years honorably with the US Army and no UCMJ action against him. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident (s) that caused the initiation of the discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant further contends, he was discharged for PT failure but bias from an incident relating to medication he taking was held against him. However, the merit of this contention cannot be substantiated because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the available record. The applicant also contends, his medical board decision was not included to determine at that time that he was responsible for his actions. The record of evidence shows that a sanity board found at the time of the alleged criminal conduct the applicant had a severe mental disease or defect, substance intoxication delirium (DSM 5, F 19.921). At the time of the alleged criminal conduct, he was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or wrongfulness of his conduct. The applicant additionally contends, his discharge being characterized as general (under honorable conditions) was unfair to him and the effort he gave over the years. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that 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. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier's separation specifically allows such characterization. Lastly, the applicant contends, his discharge packet that was signed by his Division Commander, MG W., was different from the one he signed and he decided not to add any matters in his defense. 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 this contention. There is no evidence in the available record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. 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): None b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 April 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH). 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 AR20170018343 4