1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 14 April 2015 b. Date Received: 11 May 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable conditions and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, at the time she enlisted, she suffered from emotional disturbance. She discussed this in great detail with her recruiter, who coached her through the entry process to avoid being denied entry due to the conditions. After she went to AIT, she began having severe panic episodes, derealization (sic), and deep fears. She discussed her condition with her commanding officer who advised her not to go to medical or she would be out-processed due to mental health issues. She kept these feelings inside, however, the mood disorders and suffering rapidly advanced. She felt ashamed and helpless given the lack of empathy and stigma on "mental illness" during her time of service. She wanted to serve and wanted to fight for her country and was an exemplary student. After a severe psychotic episode, she walked off the base and went AWOL. She called her commanding officer several times throughout the course of the next month. Her commander threatened severe punishment and was inflammatory, despite her pleading her case about her devastating illness that was manifesting. After 35 days, she turned herself into Fort Lewis, WA, where she was then sent to Fort Sill, OK and out-processed from the Army. She was unclear of the final paperwork and had sustained two physical injuries while in service. Further, the mental incidents were swept under the rug. After she returned home, she began to suffer emotionally. She returned to shame and the stigma of failing her country, her family and herself. After pursuing medical assistance for her mental health, she was found to suffer from Bipolar 1, GAD, and severe debilitating Panic Disorder. In 2007, she was awarded full disability by SSDI. She deeply regrets not seeking medical help while in service, but was told that it would lead to detrimental consequences and possible retaliation by her peers and commanding officers. Her other than honorable conditions discharge has shamed her and has resulted in nightmares and regrets. She desires the upgrade to reflect how hard she tried to serve her country, although physically and mentally unable. If she had another chance, she would have pursued staying on active duty by seeking help. She believes she probably would not have been out-processed medically, but would have kept her on honorable grounds. She doesn’t deny what she did was wrong, but her actions were a result of her illness. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 July 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, there is insufficient evidence to determine if there was a nexus between the applicant's behavioral health diagnoses and misconduct (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: 15 November 2002 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 5 March 2002 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 20 / 1-year College / 123 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-2 / 67R, AH-64 Attack Helicopter Repair / 7 months, 4 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not reflect any awards, however, the applicant’s service records shows she was awarded the Aviation Badge-Basic. Based her time in service, the applicant should have been awarded the ASR. g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet, dated 23 July 2002, shows charges were received against the applicant for violation of Article 85, UCMJ, for absenting herself from her unit on or about 21 June 2002. The charge sheet did not reflect the applicant had been informed of the charges. Memorandum, dated, 29 July 2002, wherein the applicant opted not to undergo a medical examination during her separation proceedings. i. Lost Time: 36 days (AWOL, 21 June 2002 - 27 July 2002) j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 14 April 2015; DD Form 214; and a letter from the Social Security Administration, dated 1 May 2015. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for 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. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate. AR 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "KFS" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members’ discharges. “Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre-existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service.” “Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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 conditions and a narrative reason change. 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 specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs. This presumption is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity in this case and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant contends that medical issues contributed to her discharge from the Army. However, 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 contends she was pressured by her command not to seek medical attention. However, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with her overall service record. If the applicant desires a personal appearance, it is her responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record. The applicant will need to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence (i.e., discharge packet) sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. 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 administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 July 2016, 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: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable 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 OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150008324 1