1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 December 2016 b. Date Received: 23 December 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, he was punished twice: first when he received extra duty and a demotion; and, secondly, when he was discharged. Due to his discharge, his GI Bill benefit reflects that he only has two years, ten months and twenty days of active duty service. He actually has a total of four years, ten months and seven days of active duty. Based on this, he cannot be granted the 100 percent of the education benefit that he is entitled to. He states he completed his first three-year enlistment and then reenlisted. He completed half of his second enlistment contract, therefore, he should be entitled to 100 percent of his GI Bill benefit. He was a victim of double punishment and therefore, his characterization of service should be changed to honorable. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, including the applicant's case files, AHLTA and JLV.AHLTA notes indicate applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Dependence, Anxiety Disorder NOS, Depression and PTSD while in the military. Applicant initially presented to Behavioral Health (BH) in July 2011 with symptoms of depression, anhedonia and impaired sleep. He was diagnosed with Depression and given a sleeping medication. In Aug 2012, he was seen by ASAP and diagnosed with Alcohol Abuse initially, later changed to Alcohol Dependence. While being followed by ASAP, the applicant also attended the Addiction Medicine Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP). A Sep 2012 BH note indicates applicant had a pending Article 15 for domestic violence towards his wife. The note also indicates that had been drinking more since returning from deployment and endorsed increased irritability, nightmares, intrusive recollections, hypervigilance and emotional numbing. During this BH visit, the applicant reported receiving an Article 15 in 2012 for disrespecting an NCO. In Oct 2012, via telepsychiatry, he was evaluated for his chapter 14-12 separation. This evaluation indicated that the applicant was being separated for pending Article 15 for assault and alcohol ingestion while on duty. The VA medical record indicates that the applicant has been found 70% SC for PTSD. He is also being worked up by the VA for mild TBI. According to the VA notes, the applicant suffered two head injuries in 2009: he fell off of a vehicle and had a brief LOC and he was near an IED when it detonated and also had brief LOC. Based on the available information, the applicant has a behavioral health diagnosis which mitigates some of his misconduct. As PTSD is associated with the use of alcohol for self-medication, there is a nexus between his PTSD and the offense of drinking while on duty. PTSD is mitigating for this offense. PTSD, however, does not mitigate the offense of assault. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 23 March 2018, 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 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 27 December 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: 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: 3 February 2011 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 12B10, Combat Engineer / 4 years, 10 months, 7 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 21 February 2008 - 2 February 2011 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (14 December 2008 -14 November 2009, 20 September 2011 - 21 December 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ICM-3CS, ARCOM, AAM-3, MUC-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 and DD Form 293. 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. 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 specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's contentions about being punished twice were carefully considered. However, 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 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. Further, the available 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 applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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 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 record, 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 DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 23 March 2018, 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 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 Code to: No Change f. Change RE Code 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 AR20170002735 1