1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 May 2017 b. Date Received: 30 May 2017 c. Counsel: 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 her narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, her whole ordeal started around October 2009, after she had been part of the Ohio National Guard Recruiting Command for a little over four years. Her previous Station Commander/Team Leader was forced out of the Ohio Army National Guard due to false accusations. The Army Review Board reviewed his case and some relief was given. She was thought to have given him help on his case so the command came after her the same way they did him and many others. She contends she had medical issues, was married to a recruiter who was also on the same team, she was a mother and by 1 October 2009 she was expecting another child that her husband did not want. It started as excessive counseling then went into verbal harassment and ended up mental abuse by her chain of command and also her husband, who had made a deal with the 1SG to help remove her from the military. After her second child was born in July 2010 she suffered from severe postpartum depression. She was sent to Fort Knox for medical evaluation but was never given a chance to recover from her postpartum depression. She was led to believe she was on convalescent leave, then ordered to report and put back on duty. The whole time she was being verbally abused by her husband, he stated she was bringing his career down. At one point he told her to put their second child up for adoption. She contends she had no one to help her and she was never offered any type of legal counsel and before she knew it she was discharged on 27 January 2011, for desertion. On March 2011 her husband filed for divorce and full custody of their two children, she was ordered to pay child support based on her E-6 pay although she had been discharge for two months at the rank of E-1. DFAS continued to pay her through March 2011 as an E-6 and she did not receive a DD Form 214 for almost a year allowing the state of Ohio and her husband to bring false accusation against her in court. She tried going to the Ohio Supreme Court but was denied due to the fact of her military discharge. She contends it has been a horrible 6 years, she still fights depression every day, only gets to see her kids on the weekend and then she has to drive two hours one way to get them and take them back. She has finally mustered up the courage to fight this, she was a very good recruiter who put many good soldiers in boots and who are still in; all she wants is the chance to clear her name and get her life back. She contends a lot of things fell into place after she was discharged. She find it hard to believe if she was really AWOL all those days and why would they wait until the New Adjutant General took over to sign the desertion memorandum, it was because the last TAG or ATAG was not told of her alleged status. The memorandums to her brother and herself were placed in her discharge packet the day of her discharge and at no time did her brother or she receive anything in the mail. She found out that her discharge was slowed down in order for her husband to file for divorce and take her kids from her. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case files, AHLTA and JLV reviewed. AHLTA indicates applicant was diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder without Hyperactivity while on active duty. She received medication for this condition. AHLTA contains three BH notes regarding applicant. First note is documentation of a phone call from her National Guard LTC requesting a MSE. LTC reported to psychologist that applicant had performance issues and had claimed a shoulder injury but provided no documentation. He also reported that applicant was granted convalescent leave for mental stress and then went AWOL for 25 Days. He also reported that her relationship with her 1SG was strained. The second and third Behavioral Health (BH) notes in AHLTA document her BH evaluation. This evaluation stated that the reasons given by command for the MSE were generalized anxiety, depression and a civilian physician request for medical leave for the applicant. The evaluating psychologist reported that applicant was fit for duty. VA records indicate that applicant is 80% SC: 70%-PTSD, 10%-Fibromyalgia. Her PTSD trauma appears to be related to abuse she endured from her ex-husband (states he physically abused her and made threats to her at her home and workplace which caused her to have panic attacks) and from her chain of command and male coworkers. She stated that, as a recruiter, she had witnessed male coworkers and supervisors abusing applicants. She stated that she had been a witness for rape proceedings and this had led to retaliation by her male coworkers and chain of command. She reported she was harassed after testifying honestly about this situation in a hearing. She felt targeted by command. She reported she had been charged with AWOL when she was on approved medical leave by a psychiatrist. Based on the available information, the applicant has a mitigating Behavioral Health condition-PTSD for the misconduct which resulted in her discharge from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 April 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is improper based on the applicant's length of service, severe family matters, arbitrary and capricious actions by the chain of command, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH and service-connected PTSD diagnosis). Therefore, the board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 5-3, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF. The board determined the reentry eligibility (RE) code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Desertion) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c(1) / JKF / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 27 January 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 January 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), shows the applicant was charged with being absent without authority and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently from 8 November 2010 until her return on 11 January 2011. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 September 2005 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 88M30, Motor Transport Operator / 7 years, 1 month, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 16 July 2003 to 4 January 2004 / NA ADT, 5 January 2004 to 23 April 2004 / UNC ARNG, 24 April 2004 to 3 March 2005 / NA AGR, 4 March 2005 to 15 September 2005 / NA (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: 1 October 2006 to 30 September 2008 (two reports), Among The Best 1 October 2008 to 30 September 2009, Fully Capable 1 October 2009 to 30 September 2010, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Several email's reference the applicant's AWOL status from her First Sergeant. Field Grade Officer's Letter of Reprimand, dated 27 May 2010, for having demonstrated multiple characteristics of inefficiency and engaging in a pattern of misconduct that shows she could not perform the duties and responsibilities of a Staff Sergeant and Recruiting and Retention NCO in the Recruiting and Retention Battalion. Her inefficiency and misconduct occurred between 2 October 2009 and 17 May 2010. Memorandum, dated 25 October 2010, showing the applicant was notified in reference to her separation for cause from full-time National Guard Status (AGR). Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for a total of 126 days; 1 day (19 January 2010 to 19 January 2010); 4 days (21 January 2010 to 24 January 2010); 25 days (8 February 2010 to 4 March 2010); 1 day (8 March 2010 to 8 March 2010); 31 days (22 September 2010 to 22 October 2010); 1 day (26 October 2010 to 26 October 2010), and 63 days (9 November 2010 to 10 January 2011). The mode of return is unknown. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 September 2010, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for attention-deficit disorder, primarily inattentive. It was noted that she had the capacity to distinguish right from wrong, that she was deployable, and that she met retention requirements and was fit for duty. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; leave and earnings statement (LES); self- authored letter; unemployment documents; letters of concern; email documents; medical documents; discharge orders; DD Form 458; evaluation reports; award certificates; counseling statement issued to her husband; record of proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ (incomplete); court documents 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(1) allows for an absentee returned to military control from a status of absent without leave or desertion to be separated for commission of a serious offense. 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 "JKF" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (desertion). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKF" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 through legal counsel requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to her narrative reason for 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 completed facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his 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 14-12c(1), by reason of Misconduct (Desertion), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). Barring evidence to the contrary, all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been protected throughout the separation process. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(1), AR 635- 200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Desertion)," and the separation code is "JKF"." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. 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 available record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it is her responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the complete facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The applicant' seeks relief contending a lot of things fell into place after she was discharged. She finds it hard to believe if she was really AWOL all those days why would they wait until the New Adjutant General takes over to sign the desertion memorandum, it was because the last TAG or ATAG was not told of her alleged status. The memorandums to her brother and herself were place in her discharge packet the day of her discharge and at no time did her brother or she receive anything in the mail. She found out that her discharge was slowed down in order for her husband to file for divorce and take her kids from her. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, it is unknown if her contentions have merit because the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the service record. The burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents such as the complete discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. Also it was noted by the Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 September 2010, that the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for attention-deficit disorder, primarily inattentive. However, the service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service at the time of discharge. 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 13 April 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is improper based on the applicant's length of service, severe family matters, arbitrary and capricious actions by the chain of command, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH, and service-connected PTSD diagnosis). Therefore, the board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 5-3, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF. The board determined the reentry eligibility (RE) code 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: Secretarial Authority d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 5-3 e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JFF/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 AR20170010131 2