1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 August 2016 b. Date Received: 22 August 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 improper because although he was given the opportunity to enroll in the Army Substance Abuse Program he was unable to complete it due to being deployed. Upon return from deployment he was enrolled again and completed the program but his chapter process had already been started and the decision was made by his unit to give him the general (under honorable conditions) discharge. After being discharge he contends he was diagnosed with PTSD, anxiety, and depression which he thinks could have been treated before he was discharged. He is no longer the person he was and has learned many lessons from the decisions that he made in the past. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant did not have a mitigating medical or behavioral health condition for the offenses. The applicant is currently being seen by the VA for PTSD, Anxiety, and Depression and has a service connected rating of 50 percent. In summary, the applicant was aware of and received ASAP services through evaluation and treatment between 2007 and 2009. Although, the applicant has a current 50 percent rating for PTSD by the VA, based on the brevity of ASAP notes during his time in service, there is a lack of evidence that alcohol use at the time of the three alcohol related incidents was in regards to self-medicating purposes. Lastly, his behavioral health condition is not reasonably related to the gun charge. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 9 April 2010 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 9 September 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: having two alcohol related offenses within a 12 month period of time. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 9 September 2009, the applicant requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 19 February 2010, in the board proceedings concerning the applicant, the board carefully considered the evidence before it and found the allegation in the notice of administrative separation IAW AR 635-200, Chapter 14 was supported by preponderance of the evidence. In view of the findings, the board recommended that the applicant be separated from active service with the issuances of a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 March 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 April 2005 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 87 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 42A20, Human Resources Specialist / 7 years, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 12 March 2003 to 14 April 2005 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (29 January 2005 to 7 January 2006 and 24 October 2007 to 12 December 2008) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM, VUA, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, NOPDR, ASR, OSR-2 g. Performance Ratings: 1 June 2007 to 1 April 2008 (two reports), Fully Capable 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, for driving under the influence, speeding, and for loud music violation on 15 December 2008. Memorandum of Reprimand for driving while under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol content of .218 on 15 December 2008. The unit commander's recommendation memorandum, dated 10 September 2009, makes reference in 1k (record of trials by court-martial) that the applicant received a summary court- martial, the punishments was reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $933 pay per month for one month; and confinement for 30 days. Documents supporting this court-martial were not found in the available records. Military Police Report, dated 10 May 2009, shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for driving under the influence and discharge of a firearm in the city Memorandum of Reprimand for driving while under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol content of .204 discharging 5-6 rounds from a .40 Cal Glock on 9 May 2009. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 17 June 2009, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for alcohol dependence, early remission. It was noted that the applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings. There was no evidence of psychosis. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and VA Rating documents showing the applicant was rated 50 percent service connected disability for PTSD. 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 14-12c 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) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, that his discharge was improper because although he was given the opportunity to enroll in the Army Substance Abuse Program he was unable to complete it due to being deployed. Upon return from deployment he was enrolled again and completed the program but his chapter process had already been started and the decision was made by his unit to give him the general (under honorable conditions) discharge. 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 the contention that his discharge was improper. Evidence of record shows separation action was initiated against the applicant after he had two alcohol related offenses within a 12 month period of time and several other noted incidents of misconduct. 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 that after being discharge he was diagnosed with PTSD, anxiety, and depression which he thinks he could have been treated before he was discharged. 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 medical evidence in the 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. Also, the Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 17 June 2009, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for alcohol dependence, early remission. However, it was noted that the applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings. There was no evidence of psychosis. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. It was also noted that the applicant screened negative for PTSD or TBI. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 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 AR20160015146 1