1. Applicant's Name: a . Application Date: 8 August 2018 b. Date Received: 13 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, an upgrade will allow her to obtain better job opportunities so she can provide for her family and apply for veteran's benefits. The applicant states, she has several different employment opportunities that she qualifies for and an honorable discharge would help improve her chances. The applicant is an active member of Federally Employed Women, who participates in several different organizations and volunteers in her local community. 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), notes indicate diagnoses of Acute Reaction to Stress; Adjustment Disorder; PTSD (a post-service diagnosis listed in AHLTA). The date of onset of her PTSD nor the causative traumatic stressor are not documented. There are no clinical notes in the VA medical records. The applicant is not service-connected from the VA. Additionally, the applicant's diagnoses of Acute Reaction to Stress and PTSD, while falling under the purview of the Liberal Consideration guidance, would not mitigate the applicant's current discharge given that her misconduct of theft, is not part of the natural history or sequelae of either. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 January 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 17 August 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 January 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: She wrongfully took $1,306.86 cents from SPC M. B. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 17 March 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 April 2008 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 May 2006 / 4 years, 20 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 84 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 1 year, 11 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (15 March 2007 - 27 September 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: JSCOM, NDSM, ACM, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 March 2008, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. Article 139 Claim (memo), dated 16 January 2009, reflects the Commander Headquarters, 7TH Special Forces Group (Airborne), determined the claim submitted by Specialist M. B., was cognizable and meritorious under the provisions of Article 139, UCMJ, and AR 27-20, Chapter 9, in the amount of $1,306.86. The commander assessed the pay of the applicant in that amount. The Disbursing Officer was directed to withhold $1,306.86 from the pay of the applicant and pay it to Specialist M. B. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, she is an active member of Federally Employed Women, who participates in several different organizations and volunteers in her local community. 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. 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 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 applicant contends that an upgrade of herdischarge would allow veterans benefits. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits 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. 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 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 29 January 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 AR20180012747 1