1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 25 January 2018 b. Date Received: 30 January 2018 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. In the alternate, the applicant requests that he be allowed to complete three more years in the USAR at any rank and be allowed to retire. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he believes of his 23 years in the USAR, he has 17 good years for credit. The applicant states, he returned from a combat tour in 2007 and almost immediately, he started experiencing PTSD related issues, which included: agitation, irritability, hostility, hypervigilance, self-destructive behavior, and social isolation. Additionally, he was diagnosed with COPD upon returning, which he believes was a related to burn pit exposure, because he had never had respiratory issues before. He began self-medicating with alcohol to cope with his anxiety and panic attacks. He contacted military one source for help, but they only authorized him five counseling sessions. During a drinking blackout, he consumed an illicit substance that he was not aware of and tested positive on a drug test that weekend. He states, no one asked him, if he needed help or if he had a problem; instead, they just started separation proceedings, which took about two years. During the separation proceedings, he continued to attend battle assemblies and received positive evaluations until he was separated after a board. During the same period, he submitted drug tests that all had negative results. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, there was insufficient evidence to determine if SM had a mitigating medical or behavioral health condition. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 June 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: NIF / AR 135-175 / NIF / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 April 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (4) GCMCA Recommendation Date / Characterization: NIF (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: Orders D-04-204978, dated 2 April 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 18 August 1995 / Indefinite (USAR) b. Age at Appointment / Education / GT Score: 24 / NIF / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-4 / 31A, Military Police Officer / 23 years, 10 months, 3 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 20 January 1988 - 21 June 1989 / NA ADT, 22 June 1989 - 3 August 1989 / UNC USAR, 4 August 1989 - 5 August 1994 / NIF ARNG, 6 August 1994 - 17 August 1995 / HD USAR, 18 August 1995 - 28 August 1998 / NA AD, 29 August 1998 - 20 December 1995 / HD (Concurrent Service) USAR, 21 December 1995 - 29 May 2006 / NA (Concurrent Service) AD, 30 May 2006 - 1 September 2007 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait-Iraq (12 August 2006 - 2 August 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: BSM, ARCOM-2, AAM-2, NDSM-BS, GWOTSM, ICM, ASR, OSR, AFRMM g. Performance Ratings: 5 December 1996 - 4 December 1997 / Promote with Contemporaries 5 December 1997 - 4 December 1998 / Fully Qualified 5 December 1998 - 23 June 2001 / Best Qualified 24 June 2001 - 7 April 2003 / Best Qualified 8 April 2003 - 6 June 2005 / Best Qualified 7 June 2005 - 29 July 2007 / Best Qualified 30 July 2007 - 3 May 2010 / Best Qualified 4 May 2010 - 3 May 2011 / Fully Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his VA disability rating decision, dated 27 May 201, which reflects the applicant was rated 50 percent disability for PTSD with secondary depression and alcohol abuse. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; Orders D-04-204978; and, VA rating decisions and allied documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 135-175, prescribes the policies, criteria, and procedures governing the separation of Reserve officers of the Army. Chapter 6, prescribes the means and procedures governing the submission of resignations which may be submitted by Reserve officers of the Army. The characterization is based upon the quality of the Officer's service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization. Possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, and under other than honorable conditions. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. 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. In the alternate, the applicant requests that he be allowed to complete three more years in the USAR at any rank and be allowed to retire. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. However, the service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army Reserve. The applicant's record does contain a properly constituted discharge Orders D-04-204978, dated 2 April 2012. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the type of discharge he received from the U.S. Army Reserve. The orders indicate the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-175, with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests that he be allowed to reenter the military and serve in any rank for three years, which would allow him to retire. However, the applicant's request does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. The applicant's contentions 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. The applicant contends the VA has granted him a service connected disability for PTSD. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The applicant contends his leadership never offered him any help to cope with his issues. However, 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 applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. 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 6 June 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 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 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 AR20180003506 1