1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 May 2019 b. Date Received: 30 May 2019 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 effect, that the discharge was improper because the applicant was suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and attempts for treatment while in the military were not taken seriously. Evidence of record shows the applicant had a prior records review on 9 May 2016. 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, Primary Insomnia, Partner Relational Problem, and Antisocial Personality Traits. The applicant is 70% service-connected for PTSD 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 personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 March 2020, and by a 3-2 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. 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 November 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge (per servicing judge advocate's review, dated 1 October 2013) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: None (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 October 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 30 March 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25C10, Radio Operator/Maintainer / 3 years, 7 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Afghanistan (31 March 2011 to 1 April 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, USAFGCM, NDSM, ACM-2CS-2; GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Discharge Orders, dated 15 October 2013 i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF; however, documents submitted by the applicant from the Department of Veterans Affairs show he has been awarded 70 percent service connected disability for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), insomnia, depressive disorder, and anxiety. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Med-Star Medical Group Office Notes; Chronological Records of Medial Care; Office notes from M.T, LCSW; Army Medical Records; VA Disability Compensation Approval; Letters of Support; enlisted records brief (ERB); Army Commendation Medal; 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 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 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his 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. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). Barring evidence to the contrary, all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been protected throughout the separation process. The applicant seeks relief contending that his discharge was improper because he was suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and his attempts for treatment while in the military were not taken seriously. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, a determination on whether these contentions have merit cannot be made because the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. Moreover, 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 this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his discharge was improper because he was suffering from PTSD. 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. It should be noted; the fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence submitted by the applicant is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. Also, although the applicant is scheduled for a personal appearance hearing, it would still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and 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 because they are not available in the official record. 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 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): Personal Letter - 2 Pages Medical Documentation - 11 Pages 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. Counsel / Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 March 2020, and by a 3-2 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. 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. 11. 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 AR20190009061 3