1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 May 2016 b. Date Received: 10 June 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 once he was deployed in 2009, his behavior and attitude charged due to the triggers which lead to PTSD. He contends the experiences he endured and witness led to the challenges he faced, as he was unknowingly struggling with this conditions. He realizes his attempts to cope with the stress of service and deployment were not appropriated nor were they beneficial for his wellbeing and for others around him. He believes his misconduct was the result of not receiving help or counseling to address his increased alcohol use and negative behaviors. He now has a full and better understanding with the knowledge, treatment, service, and care that has been provided through varying sources. He is currently better able to manage his PTSD with healthy and appropriate coping skills. In order to continue progressing personally and professionally, he respectfully requests that his history as well as his current progress be taken into consideration when reviewing his request for an upgrade of his discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, Case file, AHLTA and JLV reviewed. AHLTA indicates applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Abuse and received ASAP treatment. VA records indicate he is 80% service connected, 70% of which is for PTSD. He is also diagnosed with Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Alcohol Abuse by the VA. As Basis for Separation is not in file, no statement regarding mitigation can be made at this time In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 October 2017, and by a 3-2 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 30 August 2012 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: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 July 2008 / 3 years, 16 weeks (The record is void of any documents extending the applicant's period of enlistment) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 12B10, Combat Engineer / 4 years, 1 month, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 February 2009 to 15 February 2010 and 18 August 2011 to 22 December 2011) and Afghanistan as noted in the application (date of service unknown) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-2, NDSM, ACM-2CS, ICM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF; however, documents submitted by the applicant show the applicant was awarded 70 percent service connected disability for Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder with depressed mood, insomnia and alcohol abuse (PTSD). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; medical documents supporting his claim for PTSD; decision letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs; letter from T.L., LCSW; certificate of completion of the Army Substance Abuse Program at Mountain Post, Fort Carson; extension for overseas contingency operations; letter submitted at the time of discharge; letters of support; school course grades / GPA; and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends he has been attending school for the last two plus years and manage a 3.5 GPA and has recently been accepted to transfer to a four year college for a BS in Athletic Training and in addition he is pursuing a part time job with the VA Hospital so he can help his fellow veterans. 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 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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) 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 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 once he was deployed in 2009, his behavior and attitude charged due to the triggers which lead to PTSD. He contends the experiences he endured and witnessed led to the challenges he faced, as he was unknowingly struggling with this condition. He realizes his attempts to cope with the stress of service and deployment were not appropriate nor were they beneficial for his wellbeing and for others around him. He believes his misconduct was the result of not receiving help or counseling to address his increased alcohol use and negative behaviors. He now has a full and better understanding with the knowledge, treatment, service, and care that has been provided through varying sources. He is currently better able to manage his PTSD with healthy and appropriate coping skills. In order to continue progressing personally and professionally, he respectfully requests that his history as well as his current progress be taken into consideration when reviewing his request for an upgrade of his discharge. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, it is unknown if these contentions have merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the service record. The burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence (i.e. medical documents) sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. Furthermore, 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 available 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. Also, the independent documents submitted by the applicant reference him receiving 70 percent service connected disability were noted. However, the fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty 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) or other evidence sufficient to explain the completes 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 evidence 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 11 October 2017, and by a 3-2 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 AR20160011233 1