1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 June 2019 b. Date Received: 1 July 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was inequitable because of mental, physical and medical problems impaired the applicant's ability to serve. The applicant was injured during training and was longer able to continue serving. The applicant also was victim of sexual assault during service which affected the applicant's ability to serve; the applicant was afraid and young and did not come forward at the time. The applicant attempted suicide and was sent to Community Mental Health Services. The applicant was also experiencing some family problems that impaired the ability to serve. The applicant did not feel safe and was threatened by personnel appointed over the applicant and if the applicant told anyone, the applicant was not sure what would happen and for that reason, requests an honorable 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 Adjustment Disorder with anxiety. The applicant does not have any VA records available for review. The applicant does not currently have a diagnosis of MST. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 November 2019, 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 14 May 2010 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date Charges Were Preferred: 18 March 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which shows on 18 March 2010, the applicant was charged with being AWOL (24 May 2009 until 13 March 2010. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 18 March 2010, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 April 2010 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 January 2009 / 6 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 years / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / None / 1 year, 3 months, 6 days / block 12e on the applicant's DD Form 214 is incorrect, should read 8 months, 28 days to account for Reserve service time. d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 7 September 2007 to 26 November 2008 / UNC e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 14 May 2009, for without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to morning formation (30 April 2009); without authority, absented himself from his unit (1 May 2009 to 5 May 2009); having received a lawful order from SSG I., a noncommissioned officer, to ask permission before using the computer, an order which it was his duty to obey, did willfully disobey the same (29 April 2009); he knew of his duties, was derelict in the performance of those duties in that he willfully failed by sleeping while on duty (27 April 2009); and intentionally expose in an indecent manner his genitals in the barracks bay (27 April 2009); the punishment imposed is not contained in the available record. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL x2 for 292 days; 2 May 2009 to 4 May 2009 for 3 days, mode of return unknown and 24 May 2009 to 12 March 2010 for 289 days apprehended by civil authorities. He also had 57 days of excess leave, 19 March 2010 to 14 May 2010. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (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 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 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 the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant's record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents no significant acts of achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, his discharge was inequitable because his mental, physical and medical problems impaired his ability to serve; and he was injured during his training and was longer able to continue serving. The service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication. The applicant further contends, he also was victim of sexual assault during his service which affected his ability to serve; he was afraid and young and did not come forward at the time. Although the applicant alleges that he was a victim of sexual assault during his military service, there is no evidence in his military records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence supporting this contention. Therefore, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant also contends, he attempted suicide and was sent to Community Mental Health Services. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he attempted to harm himself. The applicant additionally contends, he was also experiencing some family problems that impaired his ability to serve. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. Lastly, the applicant contends, he did not feel safe and was threatened by personnel appointed over him and if he told anyone, he was not sure what would happen and for that reason he requests an honorable discharge. Although the applicant alleges that he did not feel safe and was threatened by personnel appointed over him, there is no evidence in his military records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence supporting this contention. Therefore, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 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 6 November 2019, 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 AR20190009663 4