1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 7 October 2015 b. Date Received: 3 December 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that her discharge was inequitable because it was based on a single offense after years of excellent and faithful service. She contends she served honorably for 14 years which included two deployments and a decorated career which included being inducted in the prestigious Sergeant Audie Murphy Club; earning a Bronze Star; five ARCOM's; five AAM's; four AGCM's, and a host of other awards and decorations. She contends before August 2014, she had not had any previous Article 15 punishments, letters of reprimand, or tested positive on a Urinalysis. Then her life took a turn for the worse in August 2014, she was called to the commander's office and notified of a positive urinalysis for marijuana. She was seen as a "problem Soldier" then treated as such, knowing full well she had not had any marijuana. After she decided to accept an Article 15 (against her lawyer's recommendation) she was finally read in April 2015, almost an entire eight months later. Shortly thereafter, she fell ill and went to the Emergency Room for pneumonia and a kidney infection. Her medical providers advised her to recover at home. She sent a copy of her discharge paperwork to her chain of command who in turn, ordered her to drive an hour to hand-deliver the Emergency Room discharge papers in person. Ailed and fatigued, she could not make the round-trip drive so she was then considered AWOL, while on quarters. The harassment and separation continued throughout her last year in the Army. Overwhelmed by physical ailments, mental anguish, and a chain of command that did not seem to understand the extent of her concerns and problems, she eventually shut down, crying out for help to her family and friends during this time, and seeking help. On 12 May 2015, she gathered up her strength and drove herself to Travis Air Force Base in order to turn herself into military authorities. She spent three nights in confinement and was transported to Fort Irwin for a pre-trial confinement hearing. In finding that pretrial confinement was not justified, the military magistrate considered the charges, the evidence that she continued to maintain contact with her Chain of Command during her "AWOL" status, and determined that she was not a flight risk and that she was not a risk to commit serious misconduct. The military magistrate opined that none of the charges, even taken in conjunction with each other, justified a special court-martial. She acknowledges that she has made mistakes, smoking marijuana and being absent without leave are not of them. Her mistakes were made during an extremely stressful time in her life as she had dealt with significant health and family problems. In addition to her recent hospitalization for pneumonia and kidney issues, she needed help with behavioral health problems for a long time, but only got help, when receiving referral from her ASAP providers, she spent a month at a treatment facility in Georgia being treated for depression, anxiety, PTSD, and alcohol issues. She continue a multi-medication regimen to treat these problems. She contends with an Under Other than Honorable Discharge, she is not able to get the help she needs and this may be detrimental to her health. She contends her mother, who was clean and sober for 13 years, recently relapsed and to this day she does not know where she is. The effects of her family and health problems have been compounded by the effects of her command's treatment. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant's case files, AHLTA, and JLV. Applicant initially referred to ADAPT for THC positive UA in Oct 14. Refused ADAPT services at that time on advice of counsel. Seen in Behavioral Health in Oct 14-diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depression, rule out Major Depression. Underwent psych evaluation on 5 Nov 2014-reported anger at being investigated (would not discuss nature of investigation), decreased motivation, increased social isolation, fatigue. Denied symptoms of PTSD, psychosis, panic or generalized anxiety. Finally evaluated by ASAP in Dec 2014. Reported two deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, alluded to experiencing some trauma but would not elaborate. Stated she was using alcohol to help her sleep. Reported having some flashbacks of convoys. Remainder of reported symptoms were nondiagnostic and general: moodiness, impaired concentration and energy. Stated she had been drinking more since starting recruiting duty. Applicant diagnosed with Alcohol Dependence. 29 Dec 2014-underwent separation Mental Status Evaluation. She reported she was being separated for positive UA for THC (which she denied using). Felt her 1SG was toxic. PCL-C-58-(score above 50 indicates need for further assessment of PTSD). Diagnosed with Alcohol Abuse, rule out Dependence, rule out Major Depressive Disorder, rule out PTSD. Admitted to 28-day residential inpatient treatment for treatment of alcohol dependence. Underwent comprehensive evaluation. Discharge summary (15 Jan 2015) diagnoses her with Alcohol Dependence, Benzodiazepine Dependence, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Dysthymia vs. MDD and Borderline Personality traits. Residential treatment note stated her prognosis (with respect to future chance of relapse) was "extremely guarded". May 2015-BH note indicates applicant is AWOL. 10 Jan 15 note indicates applicant reported she went AWOL because she was angry her command denied her being put on quarters. States she texted command of her location but was still arrested for AWOL. July 2015-second positive UA for THC. In Aug 2015, deemed an ASAP rehab failure because of positive UA and multiple missed appointments. ASAP called to offer continued services after she was no longer required to attend but applicant flat out said "I don't want anything to do with ASAP" and hung up phone. JLV indicates applicant is 90% service connected (what she is service connected for is not indicated). Her VA Problem List includes following Behavioral Health diagnoses: Depressive Disorder NOS, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Alcohol Abuse vs. Dependence. One VA note states "Rule out PTSD". Based on the information currently available regarding applicant's behavioral health diagnoses, there is insufficient information to conclude that applicant has a mitigating behavioral health disorder In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 June 2017, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include her combat service, and circumstances surrounding her discharge and AWOL (i.e. 90 percent service-connected VA rating (OBH), in-service OBH diagnosis, and PTSD symptoms) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general (under honorable conditions). The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails restoration of grade to E-5/SGT. (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: 8 September 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date Charges Were Preferred: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 April 2013 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 33 / HS Graduate / 114 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 79R10, Recruiter, 91J10, Quartermaster and Chemical Equipment Repairer / 16 years, 2 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 22 June 1999 to 21 June 2002 / HD ARNG, 22 June 2002 to 12 July 2003 / GD USARCG, 13 July 2003 to 23 August 2006 / NA RA, 24 August 2006 to 10 August 2007 / HD RA, 11 August 2007 to 14 April 2013 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (21 May 2007 to 17 August 2008) and Afghanistan (13 October 2009 to 15 November 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: BSM, ARCOM-5, AAM-5, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ACM-2CS, NOPDR, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 16 October 2012 to 15 October 2013, Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Patient Discharge Summary with an admission date of 21 January 2015, submitted by the applicant shows that she was diagnosed with an Axis I for (alcohol dependence; benzodiazepine dependence generalized anxiety disorder dysthymia vs MDD) and Axis II for (borderline personality traits). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; self-authored letter; letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated 1 May 2017, showing she is receiving 90 percent service connected disability; medical documents; and two letters of support. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 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. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's available record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the 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 all 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 her discharge was inequitable because it was based on a single offense after years of excellent and faithful service. She contends she served honorably for 14 years which included two deployments and a decorated career which included being inducted in the prestigious Sergeant Audie Murphy Club; earning a Bronze Star; five ARCOM's; five AAM's; four AGCM's, and a host of other awards and decorations. She had not had any previous Article 15 punishments, letters of reprimand, or tested positive on a Urinalysis. The applicant's contentions and stated in-service accomplishments was noted and the applicant is to be commended on her accomplishments. However; the merit of her contentions cannot be established because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. 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 statement alone does 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 in addition to her hospitalization for pneumonia and kidney issues, she needed help with behavioral health problems for a long time, but only got help, after receiving a referral from her ASAP providers, she spent a month at a treatment facility in Georgia being treated for depression, anxiety, PTSD, and alcohol issues. She continues a multi-medication regiment to treat these problems. Evidence submitted by the applicant showing she received treatment prior to her discharge for (alcohol dependence; benzodiazepine dependence generalized anxiety disorder dysthymia vs MDD) and (borderline personality traits) was noted. However, this evidence is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition at the time of discharge processing that would have warranted her separation processing through medical channels. Also, the fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions that 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 her discharge processing. 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. 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 16 June 2017, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include her combat service, and circumstances surrounding her discharge and AWOL (i.e. 90 percent service-connected VA rating (OBH), in-service OBH diagnosis, and PTSD symptoms) and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general (under honorable conditions). The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails restoration of grade to E-5/SGT. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: E-5/SGT 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 AR20150018493 6