1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 July 2018 b. Date Received: 9 July 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, was never informed of a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 8 January 2018, the applicant was discharged from an Army hospital after being hospitalized for suicidal thoughts and attempts. An attending psychiatrist asked the applicant if the applicant desired to follow-up on a Chapter 13, honorable discharge. The chain of command also initially agreed to an honorable discharge; however, when the separation proceedings were finalized, the applicant learned that the characterization was instead, a general (under honorable conditions) discharge based on two counseling statements for not shaving and being late to a PT formation. Because favoritism was prevalent with the leadership, the applicant was unable to contest the discharge. 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 anxiety/with depressed mood/with mixed anxiety and depressed mood/unspecified, Other Problem Related to Employment, and Suicidal Ideation. The applicant is 50% service- connected from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Major Depressive Disorder. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 November 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of OBH). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (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: 8 June 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 May 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 14 September 2017, the applicant failed to shave prior to a first formation after being instructed to ensure he shaved prior to all formations. On 20 September 2017, the applicant moved to second platoon as a rehabilitation effort to ensure he could improve as a Soldier. On 13 December 2017, the applicant failed to report to the 0540 physical training at Pike field and failed to show up 10 minutes prior as instructed to. Since his rehabilitation transfer, the applicant still had not improved as a Soldier. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 10 May 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 May 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 February 2017 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 92 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 11B10, Infantryman / 1 year, 4 months, 2 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Counseling statements for being informed of an intent for an involuntary separation proceedings UP Chapter 13, unsatisfactory performance; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time; failing to obey an order or regulation; behavior being substandard; failing to shave prior to a first formation; being rehabilitative transferred to second platoon in a different environment and a fresh start; performance being substandard; failing to accomplish any basic Soldiering task; being provided the necessary coaching; and disregarding all recommendations. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Physical Profile Record, undated (with restrictive medical instructions describing capabilities and limitations for the applicant's chain of command at block 27 of the Profile), indicates the applicant was on profile for Chest Pain (subjected to being seen by a cardiologist on 22 November 2017), until 11 February 2018; Asthma, until 10 February 2018; Shaving Profile, Ingrown Facial Hair, Razor Bumps, until 24 January 2918; and Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety, until 8 April 2018. Report of Medical History, dated 9 January 2018, indicates the applicant noted behavioral health issues and being hospitalized for behavioral health issues. Behavioral Health Patient Discharge Summary, dated 8 January 2018, relates to the applicant's discharge from hospitalization for a diagnosis of an "Adjustment Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood," and that the applicant "was admitted to [an] inpatient ward" for the applicant reporting "depressed mood and anxiety in context of frustration with military service and interacting with command." The applicant was admitted on 2 January 2018, and discharged on 8 January 2018. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 1 July 2018. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge 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. 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 "JHJ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, Unsatisfactory Performance. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JHJ" 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 his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's service record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel; thereby, the applicant diminishing the quality of his service, merited an unsatisfactory performance. 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 he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues and his hospitalization for suicidal thoughts and attempts, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues symptoms existed, which indirectly related to being the contributing factors to his unsatisfactory performance. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his unsatisfactory performance, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. The applicant contends the discharge with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization was unjust, because he was initially informed that his chain of command had agreed to an honorable discharge UP Chapter 13, and due to favoritism being prevalent with his leadership, he was unable to contest the characterization of his discharge. 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 his issues. 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's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant claims, in effect, that the offenses that caused his discharge were minor in nature, due to two counseling statements for not shaving and being late to a PT formation. However, the service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, including being counseled on his substandard performance, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 20 November 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of OBH). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20180011080 1