1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 2 March 2016 b. Date Received: 4 March 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 effect, that his discharge was inequitable because the discharge occurred shortly after his return from deployment from Afghanistan. He contends after his return he experienced nightmares and anxiety. This cause him to oversleep and be late for formation and subsequently be discharged from the Army. He was hospitalized while in Afghanistan for anxiety. During his deployment rockets were shot and flying directly above his head. Hearing loud noises and explosions occurred on a regular basis. The environment was chaotic and very stressful. After his return from deployment, adjusting was extremely difficult. He believes the aforementioned incidents contributed to his early separation from the Army and his current characterization of service. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, there is insufficient evidence to mitigate misconduct based on behavioral health conditions. JLV showed him as rated 70 percent service-connected disabled by the VA as of 10 July 2017, with VA problem list diagnoses that included Anxiety Disorder, Depression, and Alcohol Abuse. Disability percentages by condition are unknown. The records did not show VA visits in JLV after June 2015. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 July 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, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 22 April 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 31 March 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 April 2013 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 89B10, Ammunition Specialist / 2 years, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (21 April 2014 to 22 November 2014) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: It was noted in the HealtheVet Personal Health Record that the applicant submitted shows he had problems with anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse, PTSD and depression. It was also noted the prescribed medication the applicant was receiving to treat his problems. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; letter of support; and documents from his HealtheVet Personal Health Record (64 pages). It was noted in the HealtheVet Personal Health Record page 6 that the applicant had problems with anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse, and depression. It was also noted on page 34 that the applicant screened tested for PTSD with a positive (score-4). It was also noted the prescribed medication the applicant was receiving to treat his problems. 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." "Conditions documented in the record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which PTSD or PTSD related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service 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 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 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 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 all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant seeks relief contending that his discharge was inequitable because the discharge occurred shortly after his return from deployment from Afghanistan. He contends after his return he experienced nightmares and anxiety. This cause him to oversleep and be late for formation and subsequently be discharged from the Army. He was hospitalized while in Afghanistan for anxiety. During his deployment rockets were shot and flying directly above his head. Hearing loud noises and explosions occurred on a regular basis. The environment was chaotic and very stressful. After his return from deployment, adjusting was extremely difficult. He believes the aforementioned incidents contributed to his early separation from the Army and his current characterization of service. The applicant contentions were noted; however, the merit of these contentions cannot be established because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. Also, the evidence submitted by the applicant pertaining to his HealtheVet Personal Health Record was noted; however, the fact the Veterans Administration has identified that the applicant had problems with anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse, PTSD and depression does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available record is void of any indication 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. 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 and other in- service medical records) 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. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 July 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 a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20160005422 5