1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 23 April 2019 b. Date Received: 28 May 2019 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 he was wrongfully separated and feels he deserves the discharge of honorable instead of general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant contends that he suffers from both physical and mental injuries which he has been compensated for from the Veterans Center and believes his discharge does not match the type of Soldier he was for the two and a half years he was enlisted. His discharge was the result of an incident where as he was a victim of wrong time wrong place. 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 Marital Problem. The applicant is not service-connected from the VA. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 August 2020, 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 (Minor Infractions)/ AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12a / JKN / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 July 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 14 June 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for being absent without leave from his unit from 12 May 2011 to on or about 17 May 2011; and Being found driving recklessly on or about 28 January 2011 (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 June 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 June 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 October 2010 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 91 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 year, 5 months, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 30 December 2008 to 30 September 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (14 September 2009 to 31 August 2010 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Protective Order, dated 7 September 2010, which indicates the applicant was apprehended for domestic violence. Military Police Report, dated 28 January 2011, which indicates the applicant was the subject of investigation for reckless driving DD Form 4187 (Personnel Action) changing his duty from present for duty (PDY) to absent without leave (AWOL) 12 May 2011 and AWOL to PDY 17 May 2011. Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 March 2011, which indicates the applicant had the mental capacity to understand participate in the proceedings, met the retention requirements of Chapter 3, AR 40-501 and was mentally responsible. In the remarks it was noted that the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in any administrative proceedings. The applicant was evaluated for symptoms of PTSD and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). The applicant did not exhibit PTSD or TBI or any other mental health disorder that would require a medical evaluation board. The applicant was cleared from a behavioral health perspective for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: The DD Form 214 under review makes reference to 30 days of time lost: 4 days (21 April 2011 to 24 April 2011) ;12 days (5 May 2011 to 16 May 2011); and 14 days (23 May 2011 to 5 June 2011), documents supporting this lost time was not found in the available record. 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 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 14-12a addresses minor disciplinary infractions, defined as a pattern of misconduct, consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service 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 a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment 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 characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors 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. Caution shall be exercised 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 his 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 he was wrongfully separated and feels he deserves the discharge of honorable instead of general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant contends that he suffers from both physical and mental injuries which he has been compensated for from the Veterans Center and believes his discharge does not match the type of Soldier he was for the two and a half years he was enlisted. His discharge was the result of an incident where as he was a victim of wrong time wrong place. 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 he was wrongfully separated. In fact, the applicant's incidents of misconduct and numerous negative counseling statements justify a pattern 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. It should also be noted; although the applicant contends that he suffers both physical and mentally from his deployment to Iraq; the service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication. 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 26 August 2020, 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 AR20190007667 3