1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 2 October 2018 b. Date Received: 20 May 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that at the time of separation the applicant was mentally unstable due to a situation almost out of the applicant's control. The applicant was pregnant, young, and confused. The applicant was looking and asking for guidance with the situation/pregnancy and the First Sergeant would not help and was rude and the applicant was scared and felt alone. The applicant needed help and no one would assist, so the applicant did what the applicant was told to do by the drill sergeant to get out of the situation. The applicant was 20 years old and not given proper guidance and was treated very badly by superiors. 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 no BH diagnosis while on active duty. The applicant does not have any VA records available for review. In summary, due to the basis of separation not being in file, there is insufficient evidence to determine if the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a Travel Panel hearing conducted in Warner Robins AFB, GA on 4 February 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD and MST), 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 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: NIF / NIF / NIF / NIF / NIF b. Date of Discharge: 28 January 2005 c. Separation Facts: (Evidence submitted by the applicant) (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 January 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which was submitted by the applicant indicates on 4 January 2005, the applicant was charged with being absent from her unit from 10 March 2004 until her return on 3 January 2005. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 October 2003 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / None / 5 months, 2 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: None g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Personnel Action Forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 14 February 2004 From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 5 March 2004; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 10 March 2004; and From "AWOL" to "Dropped From Rolls (DFR)," effective (10 March 2004) i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Absent without leave 302 days (10 March 2004 to 3 January 2005). The DD Form 214 under review makes reference to 24 days (5 January 2005 to 28 January 2005) of excess leave. Evidence in the records shows the applicant had a prior period of AWOL 19 days (14 February 2004 until 5 March 2004) that was noted on the DD Form 214 under review. Mode of return on both periods was not noted in the file. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; partial documents from separation packet; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 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 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 that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army. However, the applicant provided an automated DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) which the applicant was not available for signature. The Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Courts-Martial submitted by the applicant indicates that she voluntarily request discharge in lieu of trial by courts-martial under AR 635-200, Chapter 10 for being AWOL 10 March 2004 to 3 January 2005. 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. The applicant seeks relief contending that at the time of separation she was mentally unstable due to a situation almost out of her control. She contends that she was pregnant, young, and confused. She was looking and asking for guidance with her situation/pregnancy and her First Sergeant would not help and was rude and she was scared and felt alone. She needed help and no one would assist, so she did what she was told to do by her drill sergeant to get out of her situation. She was 20 years old and not given proper guidance and was treated very badly by her superiors. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, a determination on whether these contentions have merit cannot be made because the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. Based on the available record, it appears 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): None b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): Applicant provided oral argument and statements in support of the contentions provided in written submissions and in support of previously submitted documentary evidence c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a Travel Panel hearing conducted in Warner Robins AFB, GA on 4 February 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD and MST), 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 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. 11. 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 AR20190006317 4