1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 April 2019 b. Date Received: 29 April 2019 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from bad conduct to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, in effect, began medicating herself with drug and alcohol only as a coping mechanism. The applicant struggles with PTSD everyday. The applicant received the Combat Action Badge, other awards and decorations. The applicant alleges served a second combat deployment. 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. The applicant is not service-connected from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with MDD. In summary, the applicant does not have 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 14 August 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Court-Martial Other / AR 635-200, Chapter 3 / JJD / RE-4 / Bad-Conduct b. Date of Discharge: 8 August 2014 c. Separation Facts: NA (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NA (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was found guilty by a Special Court-Martial of the following offenses: without authority, absented herself from her unit x3 (3 March 2010 to 5 April 2010, 13 April 2010 to 12 March 2011 and 6 April 2011 to 4 September 2011); having received a lawful command from CPT E.H.V., her superior commissioned officer, to reside in the barracks, remain on post, and sign in with the Staff Duty Desk, or words to that effect, did willfully disobey the same (7 April 2011); steal a Samsung High Definition Camcorder, of a value of less than $500, the property of the Army and Air Force Exchange Service (20 June 2010); and wrongfully use cocaine between (4 April 2011 and 11 April 2011). On 14 June 2011, she was sentenced to be reduced to PVT / E-1, to be confined for six months and to be discharged from the service with a bad-conduct discharge. On 3 April 2012, the sentence was approved. The record of trial being forwarded to The US Army Court of Criminal Appeals for review; The US Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirming the approved findings of guilty and the sentence and the sentence being affirmed and Article 71(c) having been complied with, and the bad conduct discharge being ordered to be executed; is not contained in the available record; and government regularity is presumed in the judicial process. (3) Recommended Characterization: NA (4) Legal Consultation Date: NA (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 August 2014 / Bad-Conduct 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 April 2009 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 years / HS Graduate / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 7 years, 9 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 17 May 2005 to 22 May 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii / SWA / Iraq, 31 July 2006 to 6 October 2007 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, CAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL x3 for 547 days, 3 March 2010 to 5 April 2010 for 33 days; mode of return unknown; 13 April 2010 to 12 March 2011 for 365 days; apprehended by civil authorities; and 6 April 2011 to 4 September 2011 for 149 days; mode of return unknown. The applicant had 1037 days of excess leave, 7 October 2011 to 8 August 2014. Also, the applicant was confined by military authorities for six months as result of his court- martial. However, this period of lost time is not annotated in block 29, dates of time lost during this period on the applicant's DD Form 214. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); handwritten issues continuation (four pages); and applicant's handwritten letter to the Army Review Board (two pages). 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 3, Section III establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the ADRB to be established facts, issues relating to the applicant's innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the ADRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. 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 bad conduct to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The Board is empowered to change the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. 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's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the judicial process. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 3, Section III, by reason of court-martial, other, with a characterization of service of bad conduct. 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. Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JJD (i.e., court-martial, other), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, she began medicating herself with drug and alcohol as her only coping mechanism. She had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that she ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant further contends, she struggles with PTSD every day. The service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant also contends, she received the Combat Action Badge, other awards and decorations. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of her service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant alleges she served a second combat deployment. The record of evidence does not support the applicant's allegation. Her DD Form 214 and Enlisted Record Brief does not contain specific dates and the location of her second alleged deployment. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it is her responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. Based on the available record, 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 judicial due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 14 August 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: 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 AR20190007409 5