1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 31 December 2018 b. Date Received: 7 January 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the primary reason for request is to fulfil the ambition of becoming a commissioned officer after graduating in the spring of 2019. The applicant contends that the discharge was inequitable because it was based on a short and challenging season of the applicant's career. Since discharge, the applicant has reflected on the actions and improved the wellbeing. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder with anxiety/with disturbance of emotions and conduct, Dissociative Disorder NOS, and PTSD. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with PTSD. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 July 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and OBH), and a prior period of honorable service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 7 March 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 24 February 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which indicates on 24 February 2012, the applicant was charged with being absent from his unit and remaining so absent from 27 December 2011 until his return on 14 February 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 February 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 March 2012 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 March 2011 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13F10, Fire Support Specialist / 3 years, 10 months, 24 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 1 April 2008 to 21 May 2008 / NA ADT, 22 May 2008 to 24 September 2008 / HD ARNG, 25 September 2008 to 2 December 2008 / NA OAD, 3 December 2008 to 13 September 2009 / HD ARNG, 14 September 2009 to 26 March 2011 / NA Concurrent Service e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (13 December 2008 to 14 August 2009) and Afghanistan (12 June 2011 to 5 October 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR, AFRM-M Device g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) changing the applicant's duty status from dropped from rolls to present for duty/returned to military control. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL 49 days (27 December 2011 to 13 February 2012) / the applicant was apprehended. The DD Form 214 under review make reference to 12 days of excess leave (24 February 2012 to 6 March 2012). j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: 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 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests and upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and he indicated he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents several acts of significant achievements; however, it appears it did not support the issuance of a general (under honorable conditions) discharge by the separation authority at the time of discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending that the primary reason for his request is to fulfil his ambition of becoming a commissioned officer after he graduates in the spring of 2019. The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on a short and challenging season of his career. Since his discharge, he had reflected on his actions and improved his wellbeing. The applicant contentions were noted; 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 inequitable. 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 document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): None b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 July 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and OBH), and a prior period of honorable service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20190000832 1