1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 October 2018 b. Date Received: 1 November 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, the applicant enjoyed the service in the Army and was considering reenlisting for another term. However, the applicant was brutally assaulted, which resulted in 27 stiches to the neck and head and lacerations to the face and ear. Since that incident, it was a battle for the applicant to try and get a grip of sanity. The applicant was not provided the time to seek medical and emotional treatment-attending to appointments conflicted with work. The command built a toxic work environment and leadership was not concerned with the applicant's recovery, although the applicant informed them about needing help and support, because the applicant was struggling with PTSD, night terrors, depression, and anxiety. The applicant received several Article 15 punishments for being late to formations. The NCOs cancelled important doctor appointments without informing the applicant. The month the applicant received inpatient care by nurses and psychiatrists played detrimentally in recovery. (The applicant detailed the events that occurred surrounding discharge.) Upon being immediately discharged, it brought on stressors and fears about having financial stability and how to receive help. It has, since, been a struggle without decent employment or educational benefits due to the current 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 Alcohol Dependence, Adjustment Disorder, PTSD, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Major Depressive Disorder moderate, and TBI. The applicant has a 70% service-connected rating from the VA. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is partially mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 February 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 May 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 12 March 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On divers occasions between 14 June 2017 and 21 February 2018, he failed to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time. On 29 September 2017, he violated a lawful general regulation by possessing and consuming alcohol while under the age of 21. On 18 March 2017, he disobeyed a commissioned officer by using his phone while in a training area. On 24 June 2017, he disobeyed an NCO by failing to write a 2,000 word essay on the importance of accountability. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 13 March 2018 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 April 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 March 2015 / 3 years, 21 weeks (ERB shows an ETS date of 7 May 2018) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92Y10, Unit Specialist / 3 years, 1 month, 25 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: Negative counseling statements for being drunk in the field; underage drinking; being drunk while on duty; failing to obey orders; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; failing to obey an order or regulation on several occasions; failing to shave; being processed for an involuntary separation; missing appointments; and sleeping on duty. FG Article 15, dated 3 November 2016, for violating a lawful general regulation on 29 September 2016, and unlawfully possessed alcoholic beverage while under the age of 21 on 29 September 2016. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $783 (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Summarized Article 15, dated 24 April 2017, for disobeying his superior commissioned officer on 18 March 2017. The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and an oral reprimand. CG Article 15, dated 15 August 2017, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on three separate occasions, on 23 June 2017, 21 June 2017, and 14 June 2017, and disobeying an NCO on 24 June 2017. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $467 (suspended), and 14 days of extra duty. Record of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 18 September 2017, indicates the vacation of the suspended punishment of forfeiture of $467 imposed on 15 August 2017, due to failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 11 September 2017. FG Article 15, dated 1 March 2018, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on two separate occasions on 21 February 2018 and 15 February 2018. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $819, and 15 days of extra duty. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 1 February 2018, reflects a "BH Diagnoses" of "Posttraumatic Stress Disorder/History of Traumatic Brain Injury." The applicant was cleared from a psychological standpoint, for any administrative action as his command deems appropriate. The report also commented the applicant's condition was not a mitigating factor in his alleged misconduct. Two medical reports (North Country Neurology, P.C. and Samaritan Health), dated 8 and 16 February 2018, respectively, provide assessments of applicant's medical condition, specifically behavioral health issues resulting from his injuries. Memorandum, subject: Treatment for PTSD, dated 6 March 2018, rendered by a clinical social worker, indicates that the applicant, who was physically attacked in April 2017, was being treated for "TBI, SUDCC, and EBH01," and on 1 February 2018, he was given a formal diagnosis of PTSD. The provider coordinated with the applicant's command for an inpatient treatment prior to his administrative separation. VA Rating Decision, dated 29 August 2018, indicates the applicant was granted 70 percent evaluation for "posttraumatic stress disorder (moderate-severe; chronic) with traumatic brain injury (also claimed as anxiety, memory loss, and concentration issues)." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 25 October 2018, with self-authored statement; and VA Rating Decision, dated 29 August 2018. 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 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" 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 and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The 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. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By the pattern of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. 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 which involved suffering with PTSD, night terrors, depression, and anxiety due to being brutally assaulted, which resulted in injuries to his neck and head, and lacerations to his face and ear, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues along with post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. The applicant contends that he was unjustly treated by members of his chain of command as they did not provide him the time to seek medical and emotional treatment, and his command built a toxic work environment; however, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. Insofar as he was treated unjustly, there is also 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 sufficient 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 sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant contends, due to his current discharge, he is struggling with obtaining decent employment or educational benefits. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, 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 1 February 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, 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 AR20180015385 2