1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 22 August 2018 b. Date Received: 24 August 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change of her narrative reason for discharge to hardship. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that during her time at her unit she expressed personal issues in which she was experiencing with several members of her chain of command. She expressed being depressed due to a current divorce, relocation from Fort Drum, New York, and the birth of a child. She also expressed how once she moved back home that she would be living with her mother who would in a few months of her return be laid off from her job and undergo an extensive surgery which caused her to become unemployed for almost a year. The financial responsibilities of the household eventually fell on her. A few months after her mother's surgery she was scheduled to have surgery of her own to repair a tear in her ACL and meniscus in her right knee and a torn meniscus in her left knee. The applicant contends that her unit was advised of these matters and doctor notes and statements were submitted but was never placed into her file for proof of record. After the failure of her run on her record PT Test she was advised that she would be counseled. She was advised that she was being recommended for discharge due to PT failure despite having an improved run time along with the physical and emotional pain was enduring then. She expressed again her issues and was told that "It's life and everyone goes through stuff, and that you're a tough girl you will figure it out." She contends that she turned once again to her chain of command for help and was advised to write a statement requesting to be placed in the IRR but was denied of that option. She was that it was best recommended for her to be discharged so that she could handle her personal issues. Prior to the birth of her child she had never failed a PT or tape. During her low moments she made several improvements with her weight in which a flag was removed and an improved run time. Also documentation showed where she had been promoted to CPL but was never acknowledge for it. Before her discharge she was scheduled to attend ALC and a promotion. She truly believes that some member of her chain of command was not fair and being that she was young and naïve and uneducated on resources that they took advantage of the situation. Her unit was not there when she needed them the most and unfortunately her and her family suffered from the decisions made by a lack of help. She truly believes had she been given the support and resources she would still to this day be enlisted in the service and believes she was mistreated and misguided; and ask to have the PT failure removed as her nature of discharge to a hardship instead. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), the applicant was not diagnosed in-service with a psychiatric condition and VA records are void of a psychiatric condition. Moreover, records are void of medical conditions and treatment interfering with the APFT. While liberal consideration was applied, mitigation cannot be determined due to records being void of psychiatric or medical conditions for consideration. The applicant is not service connected and VA records are void of contact. In summary, it is the opinion of the medial advisor that the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 February 2021, 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: NIF / AR 135-178 / NA / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 16 July 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: 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: 17 May 2010 / 8 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 4 years, 2 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 17 May 2010 to 13 July 2010 / NA ADT, 14 July 2010 to 24 November 2010 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and a letter of support. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. The separation policies throughout the different Chapters in this regulation promote the readiness of the Army by providing an orderly means to judge the suitability of persons to serve on the basis of their conduct and their ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities. The characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldier's service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization. Possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. 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 and upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change of her narrative reason for discharge to hardship. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the former Soldier's discharge from the US Army Reserve. However, the record shows that on 9 July 2014, DA, HQS, 99th Regional Support Command, Fort Dix, New Jersey, Orders 14-190-00038, discharged the applicant from the US Army Reserve, effective 16 July 2014, with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity shall prevail, as all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant seeks relief contending that during her time at her unit she expressed personal issues in which she was experiencing with several members of her chain of command. She expressed being depressed due to a current divorce, relocation from Fort Drum, New York, and the birth of a child. She also expressed how once she moved back home that she would be living with her mother who would in a few months of her return be laid off from her job and undergo an extensive surgery which caused her to become unemployed for almost a year. The financial responsibilities of the household eventually fell on her. A few months after her mother's surgery she was scheduled to have surgery of her own to repair a tear in her ACL and meniscus in her right knee and a torn meniscus in her left knee. The applicant contends that her unit was advised of these matters and doctor notes and statements were submitted but was never placed into her file for proof of record. After the failure of her run on her record PT Test she was advised that she would be counseled. She was advised that she was being recommended for discharge due to PT failure despite having an improved run time along with the physical and emotional pain was enduring then. She expressed again her issues and was told that "It's life and everyone goes through stuff, and that you're a tough girl you will figure it out." She contends that she turned once again to her chain of command for help and was advised to write a statement requesting to be placed in the IRR but was denied of that option. She was that it was best recommended for her to be discharged so that she could handle her personal issues. Prior to the birth of her child she had never failed a PT or tape. During her low moments she made several improvements with her weight in which a flag was removed and an improved run time. Also documentation showed where she had been promoted to CPL but was never acknowledge for it. Before her discharge she was scheduled to attend ALC and a promotion. She truly believes that some member of her chain of command was not fair and being that she was young and naïve and uneducated on resources that they took advantage of the situation. Her unit was not there when she needed them the most and unfortunately her and her family suffered from the decisions made by a lack of help. She truly believes had she been given the support and resources she would still to this day be enlisted in the service and believes she was mistreated and misguided; and ask to have the PT failure removed as her nature of discharge to a hardship instead. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, a determination on whether these contentions have merit cannot be made because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be 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 facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 February 2021, 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 / 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 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 AR20180011864 1