1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 February 2019 b. Date Received: 22 March 2019 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, requests an upgrade due to the reason the applicant was diagnosed with service connected PTSD. The applicant was not given proper treatment while in service, which led to behavior causing discharge from the U.S. Army. If the applicant had been provided proper treatment, the end results would have been different. Without proper behavioral health treatment, PTSD continues to disrupt a person's life and quality of life. 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, Adjustment Disorder Grief Reaction, Depression, and PTSD. The applicant is 60% service- connected; 30% for PTSD. In summary, the applicant has 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 2 October 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post- service diagnosis of PTSD), and post-service accomplishments. 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 10 March 2010 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 February 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for her discharge; she had multiple counts of failure to report and disrespect towards noncommissioned officers. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 11 February 2010 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 25 February 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 May 2007 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 years / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 35F10, Intelligence Analyst / 2 years, 9 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 23 February 2008 to 7 January 2009 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM-ARRWHD, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 21 October 2009, for being disrespectful in language toward SGT A.S., a noncommissioned officer, by saying to him, "because I put it there, shit happens or words to that effect (24 September 2009); FG Article 15, dated 18 November 2009, for failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty x3 (23 October 2009, 29 October 2009 and 29 October 2009); reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $699 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. The applicant received numerous 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 23 December 2009, relates the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of adjustment disorder. She met the retention standards prescribed in AR 40-501, and there was no psychiatric disease or defect that warranted disposition through medical channels. She was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command, such as separation under AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12. VA entitlement letter / Rating Decision, dated 1 March 2012, revealed the applicant was service connected for PTSD and assigned an evaluation of 30 percent disabling, effective 11 March 2010. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); two DD Forms 214; VA entitlement letter / Rating decision (four pages); self-authored statement (11 pages); ten character / support statements; American Public University System transcript (six pages); Florida Institute of Animal Arts transcript; two Texas Department of State Health Services Nutrition Education/ Clinic Services Unit, Certificates of successful completion and a Certificate of completion, breastfeeding. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states since exiting the Army, she has gotten married, a Family Readiness Group (FRG) co-leader, volunteered with the Bone Marrow Registry to help saved lives. She also enrolled in school to become a Veterinary Assistant. Since then she also became a Certified Lactation Consultant (breastfeeding counselor) and a Placenta Encapsulation Specialist. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 Army allows for separation for misconduct with paragraph 14-1 allowing for separating personnel because of minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, or absence without leave. Paragraph 14-2 states action will be taken to separate a Soldier for misconduct when it is clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him/her as a Soldier further effort is not likely to succeed; rehabilitation is impracticable or the Soldier is not amenable to rehabilitation. 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. 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 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. By the documented pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 applicant seeks relief contending, she requests an upgrade due to the reason she was diagnosed with service connected PTSD. However, each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines the characterization of service or the reasons for discharge, or both, were improper or inequitable. The applicant further contends, she was not given proper treatment while in service, which led to her behavior causing her discharge from the U.S. Army; and without proper behavioral health treatment, PTSD continues to disrupt a person's life and quality of life. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that she sought relief through her command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. The applicant also contends, if she was provided proper treatment, the end results would have been different. The rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what she believes was an unfair discharge is not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize her good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 2 October 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnosis of PTSD), and post-service accomplishments. 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 AR20190005887 1