1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 January 2016 b. Date Received: 8 February 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 and a change to the narrative reason for her separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, she has been under doctor's care for cognitive-behavioral therapy, since 2012, due to the sudden death of her mother and losing her job as a result of an alleged retaliation for filing an EEO against a co-worker, and an EEO for a sexual assault of her Soldier, while she was working as a unit administrator for the unit. She had requested for rescheduled training to another unit, until her medical condition improved. She also requested transfer to the IRR (Individual Ready Reserve) until her condition improved. The unit failed to follow the regulations in her separation-in that the unit failed to notify her of her separation action, instead she was contacted by a judge advocate; the unit failed to provide local legal counseling, upon request, in a timely manner; and the unit discharged her without acknowledging her request for personal appearance before an administrative separation board. The unit refused to pay for RSTs performed or for mandatory medical doctor appointments for annual physical. The unit was aware of her treatment and written requests. She served over 28 years of creditable military service and 29 years of creditable service for the Government. An upgrade to honorable would be due to the "Selection for Retention" under AR 135-205 during the Qualitative Retention Board in 2012, she was an honor graduate of the Senior Leadership training (ANCOC of 2011), and there is no record of any negative counseling. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, there was insufficient evidence to determine if there was a nexus between a behavioral health or medical condition and the misconduct which led to the applicant's separation from the Army. The basis of separation is not included in his file, therefore a determination cannot be rendered. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 May 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: NA / AR 135-178 / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 15 July 2014 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: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: Continuous service from USAR enlistment, record of any reenlistments or extensions, since 8 December 2000, are not available. (The applicant's documentary evidence, memorandum, dated 9 October 2012, Subject: Selection for Retention under AR 135-205, indicates the Qualitative Retention Board recommended her for continued retention in the USAR.) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 102 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-7 / 79V40, Retention and Transition NCO or Retention Counselor, and 31U40, Signal Systems Operator / 30 years, 2 months, 6 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 18 August 1983 to 26 January 1984 / NA IADT, 27 January 1984 to 9 June 1984 / HD USAR, 10 June 1984 to 1 October 1991 / HD RA, 2 October 1991 to 13 April 1993 / HD, (Break in Service) USAR, 6 January 1994 to 7 December 2000 / HD USAR, 8 December 2000 to 16 April 2003 / NA MOB, 17 April 2003 to 24 September 2003 / HD USAR, 25 September 2003 to 13 December 2006 / HD USAR, 14 December 2006 to 18 March 2007 / HD USAR, 19 March 2007 to 18 October 2009 / NA OEF, 19 October 2009 to 14 October 2010 / HD (Continuous Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3; AAM-6; NDSM-BS-2; ARCAM; GWOTSM; ASR; AFRM-M DEV; OSR g. Performance Ratings: Ten NCOERs, since record of last reenlistment on 8 December 2000: March 2000 thru January 2001, Among the Best October 2001 thru June 2002, Among the Best 1 May 2005 thru 30 April 2006, Fully Capable 1 May 2006 thru 1 December 2006, Fully Capable 10 May 2007 thru 9 May 2008, Fully Capable 10 May 2008 thru 9 May 2009, Fully Capable 10 May 2009 thru 3 December 2009, Among the Best 4 December 2009 thru 14 October 2010, Among the Best 15 October 2010 thru 14 October 2011, Fully Capable 15 October 2011 thru 14 October 2012, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Discharge Orders, dated 8 July 2014 i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Memorandum for Record, dated 21 December 2012, rendered by a licensed social worker, indicates the applicant was being treated for her diagnosis of depression with anxiety. Applicant's temporary physical profile, dated 22 January 2013, indicates the profile was issued to her for depression and anxiety. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with allied documents listed in blocks 8 and 13 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve. Chapter 13 provides in pertinent part, that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant. AR 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills accrued during a one-year period and attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in the Soldier's refusal to comply with orders or correspondence; or a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier has failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. Discharge action may be taken when the Soldier cannot be located or is absent in the hands of civil authorities in accordance with the provisions of AR 135-91, paragraph 2-18, and AR 135-178, Chapter 3, Section IV. The characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldier's service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization. Army policy states possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general (under honorable conditions), under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. 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." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for her separation. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. After carefully examining the applicant's military records, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the US Army Reserve. However, the record contains a properly constituted discharge orders. This document identifies characterization of the discharge under the provisions of AR 135-178, and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that 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 about her unit's failure to follow the regulatory procedures for her discharge process, and its failure to transfer her to the IRR, were carefully considered. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support her issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that she may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone would not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments, and the length and quality of her service prior to any incidents of misconduct or basis for her discharge, the Board can find that her accomplishments and complete period of service were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of her characterization of service. The applicant's contentions regarding her behavioral health issues which involved being under doctor's care for cognitive-behavioral therapy, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to her discharge. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to the basis for her discharge, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the characterization of service. The applicant requests to change the narrative reason for her discharge. However, for a discharge from the Reserve component, separation orders dictate the discharge; therefore, there is no DD Form 214 involved, unless the applicant is discharged from an active duty assignment. In the applicant's case, with discharge orders, there is no provision on the orders for a narrative reason for her discharge, except the discharge authority is AR 135-178. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be her responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the complete discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. 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 the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 May 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 New DD Form 214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change b. Change Authority to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. 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 AR20160004279 1