1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 October 2017 b. Date Received: 20 December 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the other than honorable discharge was inequitable. The applicant was diagnosed by the VA with PTSD, TBI, and chronic migraines were all service connected. The applicant's mental state was affected at the time of discharge in 2015 and had been suffering from a variety of undiagnosed medical conditions for at least six years. The applicant served honorably for more than ten years of an eleven year career, deployed to Iraq twice and received awards for performance and conduct. The applicant is eager to become a more productive member of society. 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 ADHD, Alcohol Dependence, Amphetamine Dependence, Anxiety, Opioid Dependence, and PTSD. Post Service, the applicant has an 80% service-connected disability rating from the VA for PTSD and TBI. In summary, the applicant had 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 30 January 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnosis of PTSD), 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 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: 17 November 2015 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date Charges Were Preferred: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record does not contain a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 30 October 2015, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 30 October 2015 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 November 2012 / 4 years / 13 months extension 7 May 2014 b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 28 years / HS Graduate / 121 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-7 / 11B18, Infantryman / 11 years / 24 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 20 October 2004 to 6 February 2008 / HD RA, 7 February 2008 to 5 November 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq x2, 7 April 2007 to 5 June 2008 and 15 September 2009 to 1 September 2010 / Hawaii f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3, AAM-2, AGCM-3, NDSM, ICM-2 CS, GWOTSM, NOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2, CIB, EIB, MUC g. Performance Ratings: 26 September 2012 to 20 October 2014, Among The Best 21 October 2014 to 31 July 2015, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: None i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA rating decision, dated 31 October 2016, indicates the applicant was service connected for PTSD (also claimed as an anxiety condition, depression, sleep disturbances and attention deficit disorder without hyperactivity), and TBI (claimed as a head injury). He was granted with an evaluation of 50 percent, effective 18 November 2015. VA document, dated 6 February 2018, relates the applicant was assigned a combined service connected evaluation of 80 percent. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application (six pages); letter, summary of VA benefits; VA rating decision (six pages); VA documents (16 pages); certificate of completion; University of Hawaii, diploma; University of Hawaii Campus Report (two pages); letter, Shidler College of Business, Dean's List; letter, University of Colorado, Advocate's Program; Orders 265-007; University of Colorado Springs, MBA Degree Plan; and OMPF documents consisting of certificates, diplomas, NCOERs, including various other documents (35 pages). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states in his application that since being discharged, he earned an Associate's Degree and will receive his BA in Business Administration and Management this December. 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 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 the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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 not 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. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a characterization of service of under other than 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 KFS (i.e., in lieu of trial by court-martial), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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 regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. The applicant seeks relief contending, his other than honorable discharge was inequitable. 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 record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. The applicant further contends, he was diagnosed by the VA with PTSD, TBI, and chronic migraines were all service connected. The applicant submitted a VA rating decision, which indicates he was service connected for PTSD (also claimed as an anxiety condition, depression, sleep disturbances and attention deficit disorder without hyperactivity), and TBI (claimed as a head injury). He was granted with an evaluation of 50 percent, effective 18 November 2015. The applicant also contends, his mental state was affected at the time of discharge in 2015; and he had been suffering from a variety of undiagnosed medical conditions for at least six years. The service record does not support the applicant's contentions, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant additionally contends, he served honorably for more than ten years of his eleven year career, deployed to Iraq twice and received awards for his performance and conduct. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his [her] service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. Lastly, the applicant contends, he is eager to become a more productive member of society. This contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. Based on the available record, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 30 January 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post- service diagnosis of PTSD), 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 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 AR20170019337 1