1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 12 November 2018 b. Date Received: 17 December 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the applicant deployed to Afghanistan December 2009 in support of OEF X. The applicant was an outstanding Soldier who received a combat action badge and an Army Commendation Medal for going on over thirty recovery missions to retrieve damaged vehicles. The applicant redeployed back to Vicenza, Italy in November 2010 where the applicant was isolated and began having some reintegration problems. In May of 2011, the unit did a field training mission to Grafenwohr, Germany for six weeks and during this time, the applicant was 11 weeks pregnant. The applicant told the unit immediately because the applicant was a light wheel mechanic and throughout this mission was performing inspections, conducting services and pulling 12 hour guard duty shifts through the night in full combat equipment. The applicant truly believes that this is what led to a miscarriage. Upon returning back to Italy, the applicant began feeling really depressed and began drinking heavily to numb these feelings. The applicant sought help, through behavior health but it was not enough. The applicant felt like the unit abandoned the applicant and the applicant was distraught after seeing the ultra-sound and then losing the baby that the applicant ultimately tried attempting suicide on 7 August 2011. Eleven days after on 18 August 2011, the applicant was discharged from the Army. For the past seven years, the applicant has had so much guilt and shame for not fulfilling the military service. The applicant came from a military background and the father retired as an E-8 in the Marine Corps. Not only did the applicant let oneself down, but also let the family down. Despite the overwhelming mountains; getting a negative discharge, losing the GI Bill and the loss of a child, the applicant was able to make something out of oneself. The applicant worked a full time job to put oneself through college and came out with an associate's degree. The applicant is now an independent contractor and has been for the past four years. The applicant does seek treatment through the VA hospital regularly to ensure good health. The last thing the applicant would like to do is better oneself and life by having the discharge changed to honorable. 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 Alcohol Abuse, Amphetamine Abuse, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Cannabis Abuse, Combined Drug and Alcohol Abuse, Episodic Mood Disorders, TBI, Post-Concussion Syndrome, and Personality Disorder. The applicant does not currently have a service-connected rating from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Cannabis Abuse, Unspecified Mood Disorder, Chronic Alcoholism, TBI, and Borderline Personality Disorder. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted in Arlington, VA on 17 September 2019, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 19 August 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 22 July 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty on 29 April 2011; Being disrespectful in language towards SFC B.G.M., a superior noncommissioned officer on 30 April 2011; Failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty x3 (7 July 2011), x2 (8 July 2011); and Being disrespectful in language towards SGT J.S., a superior noncommissioned officer on 8 July 2011 (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 July 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 5 August 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 January 2009 / 3 years, 30 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic / 2 years, 7 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Italy, SWA / Afghanistan (9 December 2009 to 2 November 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 7 June 2011, for failure to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty on 29 April 2011 and being disrespectful in language toward SFC B .G.M., a superior noncommissioned officer by saying to him "fuck you," or words to that effect on 30 April 2011. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-3 and extra duty for 14 days. No Contact Order, dated 7 July 2011. FG Article 15, dated 14 July 2011, for failing to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty x2 (7 July 2011), x2 (8 July 2011), and being disrespectful in language towards SGT J.S., a superior noncommissioned officer, by saying to him: "I do not have e to listen to way you say," or words to that effect. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $733 pay per month for two months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Several negative counseling statements for various action of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 19 July 2011, which shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for alcohol abuse, amphetamine abuse, and abuse of dextromethorphan and Axis II for 301.9 personality disorder. It was noted that the applicant did not meet criterial for MEB/PEB. She screened negative for both PTSD and TBI. The applicant was responsible for her behavior, could distinguish from right and wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative or judicial proceedings. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; character reference letters; certificate for completion of associated in Applied Science; and civilian medical documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant provided a certificate showing the completion of her associated degree in Applied Science. 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 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 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 seeks relief contending that she deployed to Afghanistan December 2009 in support of OEF X. She contends she was an outstanding Soldier who received her combat action badge and an Army Commendation Medal for going on over thirty recovery missions to retrieve damaged vehicles. Since her discharge she has worked a full time job to put herself through college and came out with an associate's degree. She is now an independent contractor and has been for the past four years. She does seek treatment through the VA hospital regularly to ensure good health. The applicant's in-service and post-service accomplishment were noted and the applicant is to be commended on 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 also contends that after she redeployed from Afghanistan back to Vicenza, Italy in November 2010, she was isolated and began having some reintegration problems. In May of 2011 her unit did a field training mission to Grafenwohr, Germany for six weeks and during this time she discovered she was 11 weeks pregnant. She told her unit immediately because she was a light wheel mechanic and throughout this mission she was performing inspections, conducting services and pulling 12 hour guard duty shifts through the night in full combat equipment. She truly believes that this is what led to her miscarriage. Upon returning back to Italy she began feeling really depressed and began drinking heavily to numb her feelings. She sought help, through behavior health but it was not enough. She felt like her unit abandoned her and she was distraught after seeing her ultra-sound and then losing her baby that she ultimately tried attempting suicide on 7 August 2011. The applicant's contentions were noted however, the Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 19 July 2011, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for alcohol abuse, amphetamine abuse, and abuse of dextromethorphan and Axis II for 301.9 personality disorder. It was noted that she did not meet criterial for MEB/PEB. She screened negative for both PTSD and TBI. The applicant was responsible for her behavior, could distinguish from right and wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative or judicial proceedings. Also, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting herself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. 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 with either medical limitation or medication at the time of discharge. The applicant expressed her desire for an upgrade of her discharge for the purpose of being able to better herself and her life. However, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with her overall service 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 in Arlington, VA on 17 September 2019, 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 / Issue a New 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 AR20190000939 1