1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 24 March 2016 b. Date Received: 28 March 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 would like an upgrade for the purpose of being able to reenlist and become an American Soldier again. The applicant contends, following her actions which led to her discharge, she proved to her chain of command that she could be trustworthy by showing up on time, being in the correct uniform, and having a positive attitude. Her outstanding work ethic and positive attitude led to four character references from members of her chain of command and a recommendation from her company and battalion commanders to suspend her discharge for 12 months. However, a new colonel, who was known to be unfair, decided to discharge her. She contends the Army had a positive impact on her life and she is willing to start over from the beginning again. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time,the applicant had ALHTA diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety, Adjustment Disorder with Anxious Mood, Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood, Impulsive Control Disorder, and Impulsive Disorder unspecified. Her impulse control disorders would explain some of her behavior, but it is unclear if it mitigates it. It is noteworthy that her immediate command supported her retention. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 17 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 9 October 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 August 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant stole items of a value of $500 or less, the property of AAFES (between 14 March and 18 April 2015). It was noted in the notification memorandum that the offense of failing to report to her place of duty on 2 June 2015, could not be used for separation but could be considered for characterization of service. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions). (Note: The unit commander and intermediate commander recommended the applicant's separation be suspended for a period of 12 months.) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 August 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 October 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 August 2014 / 4 years, 24 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 84 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 1 year, 1 month, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 28 May 2015, for stealing an orange Polo Shirt, two pairs of athlete shorts, and a pair of Timberland boots, of a value of about $266.99, the property of AAFES (between 14 March and 18 April 2015). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1 (suspended), forfeiture of $500 pay per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days extra duty and restriction. Record of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 2 July 2015, vacated the suspension of reduction to E-1 and forfeiture of $500 pay per month for two months imposed on 28 May 2015. The vacation was based on the applicant's failure to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty on 2 June 2015. The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance counseling. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 22 June 2015, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with (Axis I) adjustment disorder. It was noted that there was no psychiatric disease or defect which warrant disposition through medical channels. The applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings. The applicant was cleared for administrative separation. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and a copy of his separation packet. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted 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 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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, following her actions that led to her discharge, she proved to her chain of command that she could be trustworthy by showing up on time, being in the correct uniform, and having a positive attitude. Her outstanding work ethic and positive attitude led to four character references from members of her chain of command and a recommendation from her company and battalion commanders to suspend her discharge for 12 months. However, a new colonel, who was known to be unfair, decided to discharge her. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting herself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts which resulting in the initiation of separation actions. 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 applicant expressed her desire for an upgrade for the purpose of being able to reenlist and become an American Soldier again. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 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 17 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 a new DD-214/Issue new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160006955 4