1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 August 2017 b. Date Received: 22 August 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, there are three allegations of misconduct arising out of two separate incidents as grounds for her separation. The alleged misconduct involves her failing to attend the Pioneer Academy, violation of pass privileges and failure to report at the prescribed time to duty. On 18 June 2016, she was informed by her supervisor that she needed to attend Pioneer Academy on the following day. She informed her noncommissioned officer that she would not be able to make it and asked for a different date. The applicant's supervisor then informed her to contact another noncommissioned officer because he was not going to be available. She contacted another noncommissioned officer and who was not able to give her proper solutions. She expressed the scheduling conflict to her chain of command, but they did not assist her in any way in handling her problem. She then told her noncommissioned officer that she would not be able to make it. The applicant stayed in communication with them and told them her location. She eventually showed up to the Pioneer Academy, albeit at 1300 hours. As a result of her failure to attend Pioneer Academy, she was given a company grade Article 15. When her battalion CSM heard about what she had done, he did not recommend that the applicant receive an Article 15, but rather go on a different date to the Pioneer Academy instead. The other alleged misconduct was her failure to obey pass policy and failure to report. She states that she was injured and was not able to function properly after being violently assaulted on 31 October 2016. She felt unsafe, and she decided to run away and go with her friends to Canada on 2 September 2016, which was a four day weekend. She believed that since Canada was under the 250 mile radius, that she did not need to fill out a pass. She intended to return on the same day, so that she would make it in time to report for her headcount duty, but on her way back, the car broke down. She immediately called her chain of command and told them that she might need a replacement for her duty in the morning. As a result of this, she received a company grade Article 15 for failing to report and breaking the pass policy. All of the punishments that were imposed, were suspended due to the traumatic events that gave rise to her behavior. In accordance with the governing regulation under which she was discharged, in order to separate a Soldier, it must be shown that a pattern of misconduct consists of one of the following: discreditable involvement with civil or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. She believes that neither of her prior incidents were discrediting or are prejudicial to good order and discipline and there were no police, law enforcement or other reports included in her misconduct. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case file, AHLTA and JLV were reviewed. Based on the available medical information, the applicant has a mitigating behavioral health disorder for the misconduct leading to her discharge from the Army-Unspecified Trauma and Stressor Related Disorder. (This disorder is closely associated with PTSD). As there is a nexus between this condition and avoidant behaviors and poor judgement, there is a nexus between her Unspecified Trauma Disorder and the offenses leading to her discharge from the Army In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 November 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, severe family matters and in-service diagnosis of OBH and PTSD. 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, Chapter 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 31 January 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 November 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 18 June 2016, she failed to go at the prescribed time to her appointed place of duty. On or about 1 September 2016, she failed to obey a lawful general regulation by leaving the state of Washington without obtaining a written pass. On 2 September 2016, she failed to go at the prescribed time her appointed place of duty. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 23 November 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 January 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 October 2014 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 88 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 88N10, Transportation Management Coordinator / 2 years, 3 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 19 July 2016, failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty (18 June 2016). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended); forfeiture of $409 pay; and, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. CG Article 15, dated 3 October 2016, for failing to obey a lawful general regulation (1 September 2016); and, failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty (2 September 2016). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended); and, forfeiture of $409 (suspended). Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 19 April 2016, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with an Unspecified Trauma or Stressor Related Disorder (Axis I). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, with all allied documents listed in the supporting documentation information section of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 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 12b, pattern of misconduct. 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 her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant's record of service, 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. 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 the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is "JKA." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends that she was assaulted by her family that affected her behavior and ultimately contributed to her being discharged. However, she had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that she ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant claims the offenses that caused her discharge were minor in nature and did not meet the criteria outlined in the governing regulaiton for a pattern of misconduct. However, the service record indicates the applicant committed several discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of her service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. Further, 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. Likewise, she has provided no evidence that she should not be held responsible for her misconduct. Accordingly, this argument is not sufficient to support her request for an upgrade of her discharge or a narrative reason change. 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 8 November 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, severe family matters and in-service diagnosis of OBH and PTSD. 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, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 10. 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, Chapter 14-12a e. Change SPD/RE Code to: Change SPD to JKN / No change to RE code f. Restore 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 AR20170012729 1