1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 April 2016 b. Date Received: 27 April 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 pertinent part and in effect, the basis for her discharge was a regrettable DUI incident, which has changed her life in so many ways but she would not allow it to define her. She has learned and grown from the experience. Her actions, the night of the incident, were against everything the Army taught her, and there would never be any excuse. She is not that same person who was immature, irresponsible, and ignorant. She learned more than she ever could in the short time of her service. She was also on profile with a hip injury that was not diagnosed until two years after her discharge, as labral tear. She was constantly ridiculed and harassed because of her profile. Along with the treatment due to her profile and DUI, she was also a victim of a sexual assault. She was too scared and ashamed to report it to her male section sergeant, but instead confided in another battle buddy. A week later she received her discharge orders and the incident never came to light. She blames herself for never having the courage to speak up about it. After she returned home, she attended counseling for the incident along with talking about her experiences in the Army and her DUI. She now has an amazing support system. She has learned from the Army-she misses being a part of something bigger, the experiences she had or never had the chance to have. She misses her MOS, battle buddies, and the atmosphere. She cannot change the past, but an upgrade would help her to continue to improve her future. Since her discharge, she has maintained an employment. She has been attending school in pursuance of an associate degree in medical assistant. 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 file, AHLTA, and JLV. AHLTA indicates, the applicant was involved with ASAP after her DUI as well as intermittent involvement with Behavioral Health (BH). She was seen by Community Mental Health in January 2013 with c/o feeling guilty about DUI, stress, and eating more. She reported a history of being physically abused by her boyfriend with whom she had broken up with, one year earlier. She also reported a history of sexual assault six years earlier in 2007. No details of assault were provided. BH provider questioned her about PTSD symptoms which she denied. She was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood and Alcohol Abuse. Review of JLV indicates she is 20 percent service-connected. Problem List includes Behavioral Health diagnosis of Insomnia. She screened negative for PTSD and TBI. Based on the information currently available, it is the opinion of the Agency psychiatrist that there is no mitigating Behavioral Health condition for the offenses leading to applicant's discharge from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 March 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 February 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol on 15 December 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 February 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: Undated / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 May 2012 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 121 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 12C10, Bridge Crewmember / 10 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Counseling statement for being recommended for an involuntary separation for commission of a serious offense, and being arrested and charged with DUI. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand and its associated documents, dated 11 January 2013, indicates the applicant was reprimanded for being apprehended by military police for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 January 2012, shows an AXIS I diagnoses of an adjustment disorder with depressed mood, alcohol abuse, episodic, in remission. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for administrative action deemed necessary by her command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 25 April 2016, with a self-authored statement; and seven character reference/supporting statements. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, since her discharge, she maintained an employment, while attending school in pursuance of an associate degree in medical assistant. 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" 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 incident of serious misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of her service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence 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 that she was immature, irresponsible, and ignorant at the time of the offense that led to her discharge. However, the record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The applicant contends that she was harassed and ridiculed because of her profile, and a week prior to receiving orders for her discharge, she was a victim of a sexual assault. These contentions were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination on the merit of her contentions. Further, 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. Accordingly, the contentions based on the applicant's statements alone are not sufficient to support her request for an upgrade of her discharge. The applicant contends an upgrade would help her to continue to improve her future, perhaps by having better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. In consideration of the applicant's post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that her accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of her characterization of service. Although the applicant did not specifically raise her behavioral health issues, a careful review of the available record indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues symptoms existed, 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 16 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 AR20160008990 4