1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 September 2016 b. Date Received: 14 October 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, his discharge is unfair because he was informed by his commander that he would receive an honorable discharge and the Article 15 he received while deployed was months prior to his discharge. He stayed out of trouble from the point he received the Article 15 and it had nothing to do with his discharge. The applicant has also received disability after his discharge, which he was told he did not have while on active duty. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant's behavioral health conditions did mitigate the misconduct. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 August 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, post-service accomplishments of acquiring an advanced degree and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Condition, Not a Disability / AR 635- 200, Paragraph 5-17 / JFV / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 16 May 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 April 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct, alcohol abuse by a licensed clinical psychologist with behavioral health, thus limiting his effectiveness and abilities as a Service member. He failed to obey a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 2.3.2 and paragraph 2.4, Air Expeditionary Wing Instruction 34-219, dated 20 August 2013, by wrongfully possessing alcohol not purchased with his CAC card, and not distributed by 379 EFSS, in a prohibited location on 28 September 2013. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable; however, the battalion commander recommended a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 April 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 May 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 March 2011 / 4 years, 21 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 3 years, 2 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Qatar (4 December 2012 to 23 November 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 8 November 2013, for disobeying a lawful general regulation (28 September 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $396, and 14 days of extra duty. Negative counseling statement for initiation of an involuntary separation and a FLAG. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 20 March 2014, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct, alcohol abuse, and that he met the criteria of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17 administration separation. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-17 specifically provides that a Soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty and requires that the diagnosis be so severe that the Soldier's ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired. AR 635-200, paragraph 5-1, states that a Soldier being separated under this paragraph will be awarded a characterization of service of honorable, under honorable conditions, or an uncharacterized description of service if in entry-level status. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge is normally inappropriate for individuals separated under the provisions of Chapter 5-17, unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service that warrant such characterization. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JFV" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, Condition, Not a Disability. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JFV" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members' discharges. "Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre- existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record shows the applicant, while on active duty, was diagnosed by competent medical authority with an adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct, alcohol abuse. The unit commander and treating medical providers further stated that the applicant's condition limited his effectiveness and abilities as a Soldier, and recommended his separation. Further, the record confirms that all the requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant contends his discharge was unfair because he was informed he would receive an honorable discharge, and the Article 15 he received was months prior to his discharge and it had nothing to do with his dischage. His contentions were carefully considered. 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 contention 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. The applicant contends he received a disability diagnosis after his discharge, a medical condition he was told he did not have while on active duty. However, the record does not contain any evidence to indicate that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. Further, he was separated under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to disability within the criteria of AR 635-40 (Disability Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation). 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. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): Character references (letters) - 4 pages School schedule - 1 page b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): Change narrative reason on DD-214 (section #28) Change RE code on DD-214 (section #27) c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None. 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 August 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, post-service accomplishment of acquiring an advanced degree and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20160016388 4