1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 22 May 2019 b. Date Received: 20 June 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 discharged at 16 years of service for a PTSD related incident. The applicant contends that since his incident he is receiving the proper care and treatment at a VA Facility. The incident occurred in April 2016 where he wasn't separated out the service until September 2018. In between those times, he was placed in E-7/SFC positions where he exceeded all expectations. He mentored several Soldiers that attended and completed Warrior Leadership Course and Advanced Leader's Course for 19K. His actions ended a career that he had started 16 years ago; he regrets to the fullest because it brought a huge, undeniable distraction and creditability to himself, 16-year Army active duty service member with 6 combat deployments. 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 and depressed mood; Alcohol Dependence; Anxiety Disorder, unspecified; Generalized Anxiety Disorder; Post-concussion syndrome; PTSD. The applicant 100% service connected, 50% for PTSD. 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 16 September 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 September 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 6 June 2018, the separation authority having considered the applicant's separation packet, reviewing the recommendation of the chain of command and the administrative separation board that the applicant be considered for separation from the Army prior to the expiration of his term of service. After careful consideration of all relevant matters, the findings and recommendation of the administrative separation were approved. The separation directed that the applicant be separation from the United States Army under the provision of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 October 2013 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 30 / AA Degree / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 19K38, 8R M1 Armor Crewman / 16 years, 2 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 19 June 2002 to 10 December 2005 / HD RA, 11 December 2005 to 31 January 2008 / HD RA, 1 February 2008 to 16 May 2012 / HD RA, 17 May 2012 to 13 October 2013 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (22 November 2002 to 12 August 2003, 29 January 2005 to 28 February 2006, 13 January 2007 to 29 March 2008, 21 February 2009 to 19 May 2009, and 20 May 2011 to 21 December 2011) and Afghanistan (10 July 2013 to 23 March 2014) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-5, JSAM, USA/USAF PUC, VUA, AGCM-5, NDSM, ICM-5CS, GWOTSM, ACM-CS, NOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-3, USAFESR, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: 28 October 2012 to 27 October 2013, Among The Best 28 October 2013 to 27 October 2014, Among The Best 27 October 2014 to 27 October 2015, Fully Capable 31 October 2015 to 31 October 2016, Met Standard 1 November 2016 to 31 October 2017, Met Standard 31 October 2017 to 10 August 2018, Met Standard h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Field Grade Commander's memorandum of reprimand, dated 16 November 2016, for soliciting a prostitute. On 15 April 2016, the applicant was apprehended by the Killeen Police when he agreed to pay an undercover police officer money for sexual intercourse in violation of Texas Penal Code, section 43.02(c). On 1 July 2016 he pled no contest to this misdemeanor charge in Bell County Court. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: The DD Form 214 under review makes reference to a period of lost time 12 days (24 August 2018 to 4 September 2018). Documents supporting this lost time were 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 14-12c 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. 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 available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the complete 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 not 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, all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant would have been protected throughout the separation process. The applicant seeks relief contending that he was discharged at 16 years of service for a PTSD related incident. The applicant contends that since his incident he is receiving the proper care and treatment at a VA Facility. The incident occurred in April 2016 where he wasn't separated out the service until September 2018. In between those times, he was placed in E-7/SFC positions where he exceeded all expectations. He mentored several Soldiers that attended and completed Warrior Leadership Course and Advanced Leader's Course for 19K. His actions ended a career that he had started 16 years ago; he regrets to the fullest because it brought a huge, undeniable distraction and creditability to himself, 16-year Army active duty service member with 6 combat deployments. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, it is unknown if these contentions have merit because the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the service record. 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. 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 and all medical documents) 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 the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 September 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 AR20190008996 5