1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 21 May 2016 b. Date Received: 25 May 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he was stationed at a unit located 116 miles from his residence. He was harassed, bullied, and at times assaulted. He contends that he repeatedly asked officials to be transferred to a different unit. The applicant wrote his Congressman, at least twice, asking to be transferred to a different unit. The applicant contends that he was not given due process to fight the discharge because he was incarcerated during the separation proceedings. The applicant also contends that he was not given the opportunity for a medical/psychiatric discharge for symptoms from alcoholism, depression, and pedophilia that contributed to his offending behavior, even when he had a suicidal episode while on a mission in California. The applicant states that the reasons for discharge were exterior to military records and he was targeted by his unit for philosophical differences like creed, religion, and political views, as well as personality and his own eccentricities. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, neither the applicant nor a review of available electronic medical records revealed mitigating behavioral-health conditions. The applicant has written that he never had an opportunity for a discharge based on symptoms of alcoholism, pedophilia, or depression. Review of electronic records available from the Army and through VA showed no history of mental conditions on either his Army diagnostic history or his VA problem list available in the Join Legal Viewer. No evidence existed in available records, aside from testimony of the applicant, of his suicidal episode in California. The available electronic medical records and submission is conspicuous for an absence of documented psychiatric history. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 December 2016, 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: Misconduct (Civil Conviction) / AR 135-178, Paragraph 12-1e and 12-2 / NA / NA / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 16 October 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 22 February 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was found guilty and confined to the Chester County Prison for stalking, repeatedly communicating to cause fear, and corruption of minors on 26 May 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 5 October 2014 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 December 2006 / 8 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 31B10, Military Police / 7 years, 9 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: NIF f. Awards and Decorations: NIF g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Court of Common Pleas of Chester County Criminal Docket. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and discharge orders. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. Chapter 12 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, and convictions by civil authorities. 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. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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. The applicant contends that his discharge was the result of being stationed at a unit located 116 miles from his residence. He was harassed, bullied, and at times assaulted. He asked officials repeatedly to be transferred to a different unit along with writing to his Congressman. He also believes he was targeted by his unit for philosophical differences like creed, religion, and political views as well as personality and his own eccentricities. He contends he was not given due process to fight the discharge because he was incarcerated during the separation proceedings. 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 this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support his contentions. 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 was not given the opportunity for a medical/psychiatric discharge for symptoms from alcoholism, depression, and pedophilia that contributed to his offending behavior even when he had a suicidal episode while on a mission in California. The applicant‘s contentions were noted; however, the service record does not support nor has the applicant any evidence to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service. The applicant 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. Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct. Accordingly, this argument is not sufficient to support his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentions. b. Observer: Yes (Father) 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 December 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board 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 AR20160009652 5