1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 13 April 2015 b. Date Received: 16 April 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions or honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he was not in the right frame of mind with making a sound decision concerning his future. He signed his request for discharge in lieu of court-martial to alleviate all his problems but unknowingly, he made his life worst. He never received any guidance in truly understanding the process. He made a mistake of not following the protocol of requesting leave and subsequent to his decision, he was charged with being AWOL. He had just been promoted and recognized as a Soldier of the quarter. He was returning to his home base when he was arrested for driving with a suspended license and was sentenced to six months in jail and a fine but spent three months in jail. He was going through financial and family problems when he became an alcoholic. He need help with nightmares while on leave due to an incident that occurred between him and his cousin. He informed his command but they did not listen. His unit was preparing to deploy and did not have the manpower to do a mental status evaluation. An upgrade would provide him an adequate employment. He has learned to be more accountable for his decisions and actions. Per the Board’s Medical Officer, during his testimony at the personal appearance board, the applicant indicated that he had been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Anxiety. He gave the name of his behavioral health professional and provided a printout of his email correspondence with her. Additionally, the applicant told the Board of his current medications. Because PTSD can be associated with acts of defiance, avoidance, and impulsiveness manifest as disrespect, there is more likely than not a nexus between the applicant's diagnosis of PTSD and his misconduct. After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and hearing his testimony, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the length of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, i.e., a PTSD and anxiety diagnosis which were mitigating factors for the applicant’s misconduct. 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 general, under honorable conditions. Accordingly, in a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA, on 25 April 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and by a 5-0 vote, the Board voted not to change it. The entails the restoration to grade E-2/PV2. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 2 November 2001 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 24 October 2001, the following court-martial charges were preferred: Charge I, Violation of Article 85, UCMJ, for desertion from 21 June 2001 until he was apprehended on 16 October 2001. Charge II, Violation of Article 91, UCMJ, for being disrespectful in deportment toward his first sergeant on 19 October 2001. Charge III, Violation of Article 92, UCMJ, for disobeying a commissioned officer between 22 June 2001 and 21 July 2001. (2) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 October 2001 (5) Administrative Separation Board: None (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 26 October 2001 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 31 March 1999 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 117 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-2 / 31F1P, MSE Network Switching Systems Operator-Maintainer / 2 years, 3 months, 5 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c(1). Checklist for Pretrial Confinement, dated 24 October 2001, completed by the company commander, provides information on the offenses; reasons pretrial confinement was appropriate; specific reasons for ensuring the applicant’s presence at trial, pretrial hearing, or investigation, which warranted pretrial confinement; and reasons why lesser forms of restraint were inadequate. i. Lost Time: 117 days (AWOL from 21 June 2001 until he was apprehended by civil authorities and returned to military control on 15 October 2001) j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214 for service under current review 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments, subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014, by implication provided the same guidance to the Service Discharge Review Boards whose decisions are reviewable by the Service Correction Boards. That memorandum provided PTSD or PTSD-related conditions "will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service." However, the memorandum also states, "Corrections Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat-related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in the discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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 the characterization of his discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions or honorable. The applicant’s record of service, and the issues and document submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority. The applicant contends he was not in the right frame of mind at the time of his court-martial and when he unknowingly signed his request for discharge in lieu of court-martial, he made his life worst. Perhaps the applicant was referring to being either both very young and immature at the time, or due to his behavioral health condition. However, the record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. Regarding the applicant’s contentions of needing help for his behavioral health condition which may have contributed to his discharge from the Army, 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. The applicant also contends that he was having financial and family issues when he decided to drink and became alcoholic, including being arrested and spending three months in jail, perhaps contributing to his AWOL status. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. Regarding the applicant’s contentions that he never received any guidance with his discharge process or help from his unit when he conferred with them about needing help with his nightmares due to an incident that occurred between him and his cousin, nor did the unit assist him with having a mental status evaluation or with his specific needs. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contentions that he may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. In consideration of the applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the AWOL incident that led to his separation were carefully considered. The applicant contends an upgrade would provide him with an adequate employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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. DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentions. 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: Per the Board’s Medical Officer, during his testimony at the personal appearance board, the applicant indicated that he had been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Anxiety. He gave the name of his behavioral health professional and provided a printout of his email correspondence with her. Additionally, the applicant told the Board of his current medications. Because PTSD can be associated with acts of defiance, avoidance, and impulsiveness manifest as disrespect, there is more likely than not a nexus between the applicant's diagnosis of PTSD and his misconduct. After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and hearing his testimony, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the length of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, i.e., a PTSD and anxiety diagnosis which were mitigating factors for the applicant’s misconduct. 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 general, under honorable conditions. Accordingly, in a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA, on 25 April 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and by a 5-0 vote, the Board voted not to change it. The entails the restoration to grade E-2/PV2. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: E-2/PV2 AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 HD - Honorable Discharge OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status IADT – Initial Active Duty Training RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable SCM - Summary Court Martial ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150006711 6