1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 September 2016 b. Date Received: 26 September 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable or in the alternative to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, she realizes that what she had done was out of character for a military member with 16 years of service. She has subsequently sought and received treatment for her decisions that led to her discharge from the Army. She states that she wishes that the circumstances surrounding her personal and professional life had not collided in the way that they did. She believes with the tools she now has from life experiences, that the outcome would have been much different. She states she now has several mentors that she is able to lean upon for counseling and advise when things get tough. They have helped her put her life back together and restored her positive outlook on life. She requests that the Board consider her gains and grant an appropriate discharge upgrade, which would allow her to obtain better employment. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case file, AHLTA and JLV were reviewed. AHLTA indicates applicant received the following diagnoses while on active duty: Major Depressive Disorder, Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Personality Disorder, Concussion with no LOC (loss of consciousness). In 2009, the applicant saw BH (Behavioral Health) secondary to anxiety and depression regarding her marriage and her son's medical condition. During this appointment, she reported she was awaiting chapter separation for a positive cocaine on urine drug screen. She was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder and Partner Relational Problem. In June 2009, she underwent a command directed Mental Status Evaluation for chapter separation. During this eval, she reported she had been deployed once to Kuwait; she denied combat exposure. In March 2011, she was diagnosed with Concussion with no loss of consciousness after falling into a ditch and hitting her head on the ground. In Aug 2011, it was noted that she was being prescribed stimulant medication for ADHD. In May 2013, she reported she had a history of a positive UA in 2009 for cocaine and a DWI in 1998. She reported that she was facing NJP for being AWOL. She was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder and started on Paroxetine (an antidepressant). On 23 Aug 2013, she tested positive on UA for morphine, amphetamine and methamphetamine. The MRO (medical review officer) finding was that there was no evidence of legal medical use. On 26 Aug 2013, AHLTA notes that the applicant was arrested for possession of drugs (marijuana) and drug paraphernalia found in her car. JLV indicates that the applicant is 50% SC, 30% if which is for Chronic Adjustment Disorder. The basis for separation in not in file but It appears the applicant was discharged as a result of being AWOL and/or for drug related offenses. Based on the available information, the applicant does not have a mitigating behavioral health disorder. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Scott AFB, IL on 2 March 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, a prior period of honorable service, personal testimony, to include combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge and AWOL (i.e. severe family matters and in-service OBH exacerbated by combat), 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 general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (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-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 10 April 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 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 4 February 2011 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 34 / 2 years college / 113 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 68W10, Health Care Specialist / 16 years, 3 months, 19 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 5 August 1997 - 1 April 2001 / HD RA, 2 April 2001 - 29 July 2002 / HD RA, 30 July 2002 - 16 December 2003 / HD RA, 17 December 2003 - 19 October 2005 / HD RA, 20 October 2005 - 3 February 2011 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska, Germany, SWA / Afghanistan (9 March 2010 - 7 March 2011); Kuwait (1 January 2003 - 1 July 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, ARCOM, AAM-7, AGCM-4, NDSM, GWOTSM, KCM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL-2 g. Performance Ratings: 1 October 2010 - 30 September 2011 / Fully Capable 1 October 2011 - 30 September 2012 / Fully Capable 1 October 2012 - 6 August 2013 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Nineteen Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 15 May 2013; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 17 May 2013; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 22 May 2013 From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 3 June 2013; From "PDY" to "Confinement by Civil Authorities (CCA)," effective 10 July 2013; From "CCA" to "PDY," effective 10 July 2013; From "PDY" to "CCA," effective 7 August 2013; From "CCA" to "PDY," effective 8 August 2013; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 6 September 2013; From "AWOL" to "Dropped From Rolls (DFR)," effective 7 October 2013; From "PDY" to "CCA," effective 21 October 2013; From "CCA" to "PDY," effective 22 October 2013; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 23 October 2013; From "AWOL" to "DFR," effective 24 October 2013; From "DFR" to "PDY," effective 6 November 2013; From "PDY" to "CCA," effective 11 November 2013; From "CCA" to "PDY," effective 7 January 2014; From "PDY" to "CCA," effective 1 April 2014; and, From "CCA" to "PDY," effective 3 April 2014. Charge Sheet, dated 7 October 2013, reflects the applicant was charged with a violation of the UCMJ, for without authority absent herself from her unit from 6 September 2013 until 7 October 2013. El Paso County Sheriff's Office, Booking Report, dated 21 October 2013, reflects the applicant was charged with: Disregard / Fail / Stop or Yield / Intersection Driving Under Restraint x 2 Driving Under the Influence Careless Driving W/O Injury Owner W/O Insurance On Public Highway Charge Sheet, dated 23 October 2013, reflects the applicant was charged with a violation of the UCMJ, for without authority absent herself from her unit from 23 October 2013 until 24 October 2013. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 137 days / AWOL, 15 May 2013 - 17 May 2013 / NIF AWOL, 22 May 2013 - 3 June 2013 / NIF CCA, 8 July 2013 - 10 July 2013 / Returned to Military Control CCA, 7 August 2013 - 8 August 2013 / Returned to Military Control AWOL, 6 September 2013 - 22 October 2013 / Apprehended by Apprehended by Civil AWOL, 24 October 2013 - 6 November 2013 / Surrendered to Military Authorities CCA, 11 November 2013 - 7 January 2014 / Returned to Military Control j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, she has obtained employment, sought treatment and has been sober for over 20 months. 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. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of Pattern of Misconduct, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's contentions about her misconduct being out of character for someone with 16 years of service were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant contends that she was having family issues that affected her behavior and ultimately caused her to be 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 contends that she had good service which included two combat tours. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of her service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for her accomplishments. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character 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 third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize her good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): None were listed on the hearing data sheet. b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None were listed on the hearing data sheet. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None. 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Scott AFB, IL on 2 March 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, a prior period of honorable service, personal testimony, to include combat service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge and AWOL (i.e. severe family matters and in-service OBH exacerbated by combat), 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 general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20160019583 5