1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 August 2014 b. Date Received: 16 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 had just had a baby and was suffering from depression because she had to leave her five month old with others when she deployed. She was so disturbed because initially she was told that she would be able to stay back and work while her company was deployed. Later, she found out that she was going to be deployed, which turned her world upside down. She explained to her company commander that she did not have anyone that she could truly trust to care for her baby. The commander responded by telling her that there were many Soldiers who did not have a family care plan and that either she could get out of the Army for not having a family care plan or she could deploy. Since her discharge, she has been in various counseling sessions and has been in an inpatient at Highland Rivers, which is a facility for drug/alcohol abuse and depression. She has been turned down from employment due to the characterization of her discharge. She is embarrassed to show her discharge to anyone. She states she did not do anything bad and is trying to better herself by getting a good career somewhere that will allow her to eventually retire. Her discharge continues to make some employers to overlook her as a prospective employee. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has a Behavioral Health Condition that mitigates some of her misconduct. As PTSD is associated with difficulties with authority figures, there is a nexus between her PTSD and the offenses of being disrespectful in language and deportment toward her NCO and of disobeying a lawful order. As PTSD is associated with avoidant behaviors, there is a nexus between her PTSD and her failure to report to her place of duty at the proper time. As PTSD is associated with self-destructive behaviors and depression is associated with self-harm behaviors, there is a nexus between the two diagnoses and the offense of deliberately injuring herself. There is no nexus between PTSD and the offense of assaulting SSG B. VA notes indicate she is 70 percent service connected. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 July 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, to include her combat service, severe family matters, and circumstances surrounding her discharge (i.e. ongoing OBH/PTSD symptoms; VA recognizes MST stemming from harassment), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (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: 14 January 2010 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 December 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: she failed to go to her appointed place of duty at the time prescribed on or about 27 March 2009; she was disrespectful in language and deportment toward SSG B on or about 28 March 2009; she willfully disobeyed a lawful order by SSG B on or about 28 March 2009; she intentionally injured herself for the purpose of avoiding service, in a hostile pay zone, during a time of war on or about 21 June 2009; and, she assaulted SSG B on or about 28 March 2009. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: The separation packet includes an undated memorandum from the applicant's company commander, wherein he states, the applicant waived her rights to consult with a JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 17 December 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 March 2007 / 3 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 85 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist / 2 years, 9 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Iraq (5 March - 21 July 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: None AR 15-6 Investigation, dated 26 June 2009, found that the applicant did intentionally inflict-self injury to herself on 21 June 2009; and, that the self-inflicted injury was not due to misconduct based on the fact that there were indications that the applicant was suffering from acute mental derangement and unable to comprehend the nature of such act of self-harm. FG Article 15, dated 29 October 2009, for failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty (27 March 2009); disrespectful in language and deportment toward an noncommissioned officer (28 March 2009); disobeyed a lawful order (28 March 2009); intentionally injured herself in a hostile fire pay zone (21 June 2009); and, assaulted SSG B by raising a stool at her in a threating manner (28 March 2008). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 (suspended); forfeiture of $699 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. The applicant received numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 6 October 2009, reflects the applicant was mentally responsible with a clear thinking process and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with an Adjustment disorder with depressed and anxious mood, per AHLTA record. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 and VA Form 21-4138. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states that she has been in various counseling sessions and has been in an inpatient facility for drug/alcohol abuse and depression. 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. 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 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 that she was depressed and could not accept that she had to leave her new-born baby with someone while she was deployed. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Adjustment disorder with depressed and anxious mood; however, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 6 October 2009, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates she was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that she knew the difference between what was right and wrong. Further, the applicant 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 contends that an upgrade of her discharge will allow her to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 12 July 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, to include her combat service, severe family matters, and circumstances surrounding her discharge (i.e. ongoing OBH/PTSD symptoms; VA recognizes MST stemming from harassment), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 AR20160009551 5