IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	8 June 2015

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20150003027
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing testimony from her attorney, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh; based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge, i.e., military stressors that aggravated existing Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), schizophrenia, and major depressive disorder.  It is concluded that these medical conditions may have been a causative factor in the misconduct that led to the discharge.  After carefully weighing those facts against the severity of the applicant's misconduct, there is sufficient mitigating evidence to warrant upgrading the characterization of the applicant's service to honorable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was both proper, and equitable, and voted not to change it.



      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant through legal counsel requests an upgrade of her discharge characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  Counsel states, in effect, the applicant’s discharge is inequitable because her capability to serve was seriously impacted by the severe harassment she faced while in service, her mental health problems that she suffered from at the time of discharge from active duty included Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), depression, and schizophrenia, and medical exams now required for service-members suffering from PTSD constitute a substantial enhancement of rights and cast substantial doubt on the applicant’s 2007 discharge to mitigate the incidents of misconduct.  Counsel contends had the applicant been afforded these rights, her discharge status would have been different.  Counsel contends a general discharge diminishes the applicant’s record of service and therefore, an upgrade is warranted.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		24 February 2015
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			16 October 2007
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14							Paragraph 14-12b, JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			A Co, 3rd BST Bn Fort Benning, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	26 January 2006/4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 8 months, 21 days
h. Total Service:			1 year, 8 months, 21 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist
m. GT Score:				104
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (Dates NIF)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ICM
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	NA
s. Performance Ratings:		NA
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			Yes, Record Reviews (16 February 2010 and           							14 November 2014)


SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 January 2006, for a period of 4 years.  She was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  Her record indicates she served in Iraq and achieved the rank of PFC/E-3.  She was serving at Fort Benning, Georgia, when her discharge was initiated.  The record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates on 7 July 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct.  Specifically for the following offenses:

a. failing to report to her squad leader after her NCB [sis] class was over (070402),

b. being disrespectful towards CPL M. and MSG W. by not going to parade rest after instructed and failing to report at the battalion TOC (070502 and 070507),

c. failing to obey instructions by not reporting back on time after dinner chow (070507), and

d. stealing another Soldier’s weapon and took off running while it was locked and loaded, the battalion CSD team looked for her for over three hours (070701).

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 17 July 2007, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and elected to submit a statement on her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 3 August 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 16 October 2007, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for a pattern of misconduct, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and a RE code of 3. 

6.  The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 5 July 2007, which indicates the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct and with cluster B Traits.  The applicant had a history of prior suicidal ideations and threats and in times of stress was likely to develop similar thoughts in future high stress periods, furthermore, a suicidal gesture/attempt may occur.  The document also indicates the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings against her and that she was mentally responsible.  It was also noted she was psychiatrically cleared for an administrative action deemed appropriated by her command including participation in UCMJ hearings.

2.  Several counseling statements dated between 2 April 2007 and 1 July 2007, which included monthly performance counseling, failure to report, disobeying a noncommissioned officer on several occasions, disobeying a lawful order, failing to follow instructions, falling asleep on duty, lack of performance and conduct, unauthorized absence, and a pattern of misconduct separation counseling.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 12 February 2015, which made reference to the applicant having previously submitted five hard copies of a brief supporting her application for discharge upgrade with exhibits A-R, the applicant also submitted a supplemental brief and supporting documents in support of her application which included exhibits A-X, that included excerpts from her medical and service records, letters of support from members of the community, health care professionals and fellow Soldiers, and her personal statements.  The exhibits include evidence of her post service activity, as well as mitigating circumstance in service.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

Counsel states, in effect, the applicant has since leaving the military made commendable efforts to further her education, be a positive and helpful member of her community, and cope with her PTSD and depression.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  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.

2.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request through counsel for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge was carefully considered.  

2.  After examining the applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to honorable for the following reasons:  

      a.  The Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 5 July 2007, confirms the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conducts and clusters B Traits.  She had a history of prior suicidal ideations and treats and time of stress was likely to develop similar thoughts in future high stress periods.

      b.  The applicant’s post-service documents from the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated 2 January 2014, show that based on the clinical judgment of a psychiatrist; the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, schizophrenia, and with a major depression disorder.  Her PTSD was the result of military sexual trauma (MST), specifically, several incidents of harassment and assault that took place during her military service.  It was also noted the applicant suffered from paranoid schizophrenia, which caused her to experience paranoia, auditory hallucinations and impairments in cognitive functioning. 

      c.  It appears the medical conditions may have been a causative factor in the misconduct that led to the discharge.  After carefully weighing that fact against the severity of the applicant's misconduct, there is sufficient mitigating evidence to warrant upgrading the characterization of the applicant's service to honorable.  

3.  This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 

4.  In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.

BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION:

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing testimony from her counsel, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge i.e., military stressors that aggravated existing PTSD, schizophrenia, and major depressive disorder.  It is concluded that these medical conditions may have been a causative factor in the misconduct that led to the discharge.  After carefully weighing those facts against the severity of the applicant's misconduct, there is sufficient mitigating evidence to warrant upgrading the characterization of the applicant's service to honorable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Personal Appearance	  Date:  8 June 2015        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No (attorney testified for applicant)

Counsel:  Yes

Witnesses/Observers:  None 

DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE:

1.  The applicant (through her attorney) submitted the following additional document:

	Letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, Greater Los Angeles Healthcare
      System, dated 1 June 2015

2.  The applicant (through her attorney) presented no additional contentions.

In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant’s attorney at the personal appearance hearing.

Board Vote:
Character Change:  4	No Change:  1
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:			Yes
Change Characterization to:		Honorable
Change Reason to:				No Change
Change Authority for Separation:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
Grade Restoration to:			NA
Other:						NA






Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20150003027

Page 7 of 7 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1