1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 May 2016 b. Date Received: 9 May 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, she believes her record to be in error or unjust because the Department of Disability had upgraded her discharge to honorable due to service-connected disabilities. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant did not have mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses which led to her separation from the Army. A limited review through the JLV (Joint Legacy Viewer) of the applicant's Veterans Affairs records notes 95 problems (13 VA entered) including chronic PTSD, anxiety, back pain, joint pain (ankle), dermatographism, pruritus, acne, headache and others. The Veterans Affairs has service-connected the applicant at 60 percent overall. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 June 2017, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 25 August 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 March 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 30 August 2009, the applicant willfully disobeyed an NCO and made a false official statements on two separate occasions, on 30 August 2009 and 18 October 2009. She was disrespectful towards an NCO on two separate occasions, on 2 January 2010 and 19 February 2010. On 7 November 2010, she absented herself, without authority, from her unit until 10 November 2010. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 April 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 25 July 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (The separation authority's review included the medical evaluation board proceedings and determined that the applicant's medical condition was not a direct or a substantial contributing cause of the conduct that led to her separation proceedings, nor did it warrant disability processing.) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 November 2011 / 3 years (NIF, but according IWS her ETS date is shown as 15 November 2014) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 31B10, Military Policeman / 4 years, 9 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (20 November 2006 to 13 November 2011) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 May 2007 to 18 September 2007), (31 July 2009 to 17 June 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; ICM-2CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR; MUC g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for being insubordinate towards an NCO on several occasions; being AWOL; failing to be at her appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; disobeying a lawful order on numerous occasions; being disrespectful towards an NCO; making false official statements to NCOs; having an inappropriate relationship with another Soldier; CG Article 15, dated 25 January 2010, for disrespecting an NCO (NIF, but according to unit commander's forwarding memorandum). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $488, and 14 days of extra duty. FG Article 15, dated 12 December 2010, for being disrespectful in language and deportment towards an NCO on 4 November 2010, and being AWOL on 7 November 2010 until 10 November 2010. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $811 pay per month for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction, and an oral reprimand. Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 January 2011, cleared the applicant for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by her command. Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings, dated 31 May 2011, showed the applicant agreed with the approved findings and recommendation of the MEB. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: One day (AWOL: 8 November 2010 to 8 November 2010) / Returned to her unit j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim), undated, indicates behavioral health issues. Narrative Summary of the MEB, dated 9 May 2011, noted the applicant was a victim of an MST in 2007, and was treated by behavioral health (pages 100 and 136 of separation file). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), dated 4 May 2016, and VA letter, dated 25 January 2016. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. Army Regulation 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By the incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of her service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends she was granted service-connected disabilities; however, the Veterans Administration letter she provided does not outline the specifics of her disabilities. However, a careful review of the record indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues symptoms existed, and that they may have been contributing factors that led to her misconduct. The separation authority considered the medical evidence, and determined that was not the case. The Board is not bound by the separation authority's finding in that regard, and can review that determination. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to her misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. 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. 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 26 June 2017, 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 f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20160009189 5