1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 December 2016 b. Date Received: 17 January 2017 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 effect, the actions leading up to his discharge were caused by high stress, documented depression/PTSD and improper help from his chain of command. After arriving at his unit, he was placed in a rear detachment and in charge of equipment with minimal support and limiting time constraints. The chain of command created an uncomfortable environment for him and his Soldiers making it extremely hard for him to be a leader for the Soldiers under his charge. The acting leadership at the time, was inexperienced in supervising him and the details of his job and the pressure from them caused him to be overwhelmed and depressed. He was unable to focus and still receive his behavior and mental health counseling for dealing with stress and depression. He was fighting depression the entire time he was in the unit, but prior to that he was an exceptional Soldier. He believes it is unfair to discharge him without allowing him to receive the proper attention. After his discharge, he continued to face adversity due to the disadvantage of being released from the military before he could achieve his planned goal. As a sergeant and throughout his entire military career, he positively impacted those around him and made the extra efforts to support those who were in need. However, when he was the actual one in need of help, he spoke out and was placed in a position wherein fighting back only made things worse. He accepted his discharge initially because he believed he had fully exhausted all other resources of support and became content to the reality that he was not a fit in the eyes of his chain of command. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had AHLTA diagnosis of ADHD Combined type. He had a pre-discharge Mental Status Exam on 08 April 2008. It found him fit for duty, and also judged that he could participate in and understand administrative proceedings, knew right from wrong, and met Army medical retention standards. He was cleared for administrative discharge. In addition he screened negative for PTSD and TBI. In JLV he is rated 60% service-connected disabled by the VA. His service connected diagnoses from the VA include Major Depressive Disorder (recurrent) and Adjustment Disorder (unspecified). Too little is known about the circumstance of his case to know if depression has any relevance; however, his representation of PTSD being relevant is unsupported by the available records. Since the basis for the separation was not in the applicant's file, a nexus between the applicant's misconduct and their medical condition could not be determined. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 04 August 2017, 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: 22 May 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 October 2012 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 94 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist / 4 years, 6 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 10 November 2009 - 30 October 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-2 g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his VA disability rating decision, effective date 19 June 2014, which reflects the applicant was rated 50 percent disability for an unspecified depressive disorder (also claimed as PTSD). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, with all allied documents listed in the supporting documentation information section of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 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. 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 available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 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 he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant's contentions about his chain of command was inexperienced and did not afford him the opportunity to attend treatment for his depression were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant contends that he had good service. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends the VA has granted him a service connected disability for PTSD. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. Based on the available record, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 04 August 2017, 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 new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20170000630 3