1. APPLICANT’S NAME: a. Application Date: 4 June 2014 b. Date Received: 19 June 2014 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, REASON, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant states, in effect, his discharge is improper because it was based on a small amount of time in service. He suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), dealing with some family stress and was moving to Fort Carson. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 July 2015, and by a 2-3 vote, the Board denied the request finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (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: 19 December 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances which led to his discharge from the Army. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 20 March 2008/6 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 19 years/GED Certificate/99 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: SPC/E-4/11B10, Infantryman/6 years, 9 months and 19 days. d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA/21 June 2006-19 March 2008/HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA/Iraq (22 September 2007-24 November 2008)/Afghanistan (14 May 2010-12 April 2011). f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, ICM-CS, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, NATO MDL, CIB. g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: None i. Lost Time: 263 days of lost time for being AWOL x 4 15 June 2012-10 September 2012; CCA 11 September 2012-14 September 2012, 14 September 2012-5 November 2012, 7 August 2013 - 20 August 2013 and 21 August 2013-12 September 2013; CCA, 13 September 2013-28 November 2013. j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, support statement (three pages), and the request for discharge citing the applicant’s charges (three pages) dated 21 November 2013. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant did not provide any with his application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Chapter 10 outlines procedures for separating a Soldier in lieu of trial by court-martial. Paragraph 10-1 states a Soldier who has committed an offense or offenses, the punishment of which under the UCMJ and the Manual for Courts-Martial includes a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge, may submit a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. It also allows for such a request to be submitted after court-martial charges are preferred or where required after referral, until final action by the court-martial convening authority; or when a Soldier is under a suspended sentence of a punitive discharge. The request does not prevent or suspend disciplinary proceedings. Paragraph 10-8 states a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial; however, a general discharge may be directed if merited by the Soldier’s overall record during the current enlistment. 8. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE(S): The applicant seeks relief contending his discharge is improper because it was based on a small amount of time in service. He suffers from PTSD, family stress, and was moving to Fort Carson. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. 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 contends his discharge is improper because it was based on a small amount of time in service. There is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs. This presumption is applied in all Army discharge reviews 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 this contention. There is no evidence in the available record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention his discharge was improper. The applicant contends he suffers from PTSD, family stress and was moving to Fort Carson. The service record contains no evidence of a PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. While the applicant may believe his family stress, and moving to Fort Carson was the underlying cause of his misconduct; the record of evidence does not demonstrate he sought relief from his stress through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. Likewise, he has provided no evidence he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. If the applicant desires a personal appearance, it is his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record. The applicant will need to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence (i.e., discharge packet) sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action for the Board's consideration. In view of the foregoing, it appears 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 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. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change e. Restoration to Grade: No Change Authenticating Officer: COL, US ARMY Presiding Official Army Discharge Review Board Legend: 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 FG - Field Grade IADT – Initial Active Duty Training RE - Reentry Honorable Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20140010996 1