1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 30 May 2018 b. Date Received: 4 June 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the command failed to recognize and properly treat the applicant's depression. The separation board's decision based on witness testimony was excessive and inequitable. 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 with Depressed Mood, Unspecified Mood Disorder, Insomnia, and Occupational Problems. The applicant is 50% service-connected for Major Depressive Disorder form the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with PTSD due to MST, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder. 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 3 June 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnoses of OBH, PTSD, and MST). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 5-3, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 1. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 August 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 24 May 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for having on 16 February 2016, while at JRTC stated she would not eat until she was taken out of the box with the purpose of avoiding service as an enlisted person. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 1 June 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 7 June 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 October 2014 / 3 years, 25 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist / 1 year, 10 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 30 March, stated she would not eat until she was taken out of the box with the purpose of avoiding service as an enlisted person. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $783 pay, extra duty and restriction for 45 days and an oral reprimand. Negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 April 2016, which shows the applicant was screen for PTSD with a positive score of 66. It was noted that although she endorsed PTSD symptoms, those were related to stressors and not to an event that met criteria for a diagnosis. The medical records indicated a brief history of BH treatment since February 2016 due to ongoing occupational problems. The applicant did not have a BH diagnosis. She denied acute BH concerns at that time. She met medical retention standards IAW AR 40-501, and did not warrant disposition through medical channels regarding behavioral health. She was screened for PTSD, mTBI, and sexual assault, she did not have a history of combat deployments; there was no BH diagnosis/suspected condition, and she demonstrated no cognitive impairments, which would have limit her from participating in administrative proceedings. The applicant was cleared to participate in administrative proceedings for Chapter 14-12c. Department of Veterans Affairs letter submitted by the applicant shows the applicant has been awarded 50 percent service connected disability for persistent depressive disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; VA Medical Documents; separation packet; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. Department of Veterans Affairs letter submitted by the applicant shows the applicant has been awarded 50 percent service connected disability for persistent depressive disorder. 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 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (serious offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" 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 requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to her narrative reason for discharge. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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 she should have been retained on Active duty. The evidence of record shows the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ." 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 appropriate RE code is 3. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant seeks relief contending that her command failed to recognize and properly treat her depression. The separation board's decision based on witness testimony was excessive and inequitable. The applicant contentions were noted; however, the Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 April 2016, shows the applicant was screen for PTSD with a positive score of 66. It was noted that although she endorsed PTSD symptoms, those were related to stressors and not to an event that met criteria for a diagnosis. The medical records indicated a brief history of BH treatment since February 2016 due to ongoing occupational problems. The applicant did not have a BH diagnosis. She denied acute BH concerns at that time. She met medical retention standards IAW AR 40-501, and did not warrant disposition through medical channels regarding behavioral health. She was screened for PTSD, mTBI, and sexual assault, she did not have a history of combat deployments; there was no BH diagnosis/suspected condition, and she demonstrated no cognitive impairments, which would have limit her from participating in administrative proceedings. The applicant was cleared to participate in administrative proceedings for Chapter 14-12c 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 issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that her chain of command failed to recognize and properly treat her depression. The fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of her discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during her discharge processing that would have warranted her separation processing through medical channels. 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 her overall service record. 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 3 June 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnoses of OBH, PTSD, and MST). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635- 200, paragraph 5-3, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 1. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 5-3 e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JFF / RE-1 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 AR20180009171 1