1.	APPLICANT’S NAME:      

	a.	Application Date:  24 April 2015

	b.	Date Received:      27 April 2015

	c.	Counsel:                None

2.   REQUEST, REASON, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION:  The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general, under honorable conditions.  The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident during 28 months of service with no other adverse action.  He feels the punishment given regarding his case was too harsh and unreasonable.  He was a good Soldier with positive counseling statements until the incident in question.  He developed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) while serving the US Armed Forces.  He has been discharged for three years and would like to move on to a more productive life.  A record review was conducted on    1 April 2013.  In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, Virginia, on 19 October 2015, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request finding the separation was both proper and equitable.

	(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 Discharge

	b.	Date of Discharge:  11 May 2012

	c.	Separation Facts:  

		(1)	Date of Notification of Intent to Separate:  NIF

		(2)	Basis for Separation:  NIF; however, the record contains the staff judge advocate’s (SJA) memorandum regarding the applicant's request for discharge which shows the applicant was charged with four (4) specifications of Article 86: one specification of AWOL and three specifications of failing to go to his appointed place of duty; three (3) specifications of Article 91: disrespectful language toward, willfully disobeying, and assault upon a noncommissioned officer; two (2) specifications of Article 92: failure to obey a lawful general regulation; and two (2) specifications of Article 134: conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline or of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces

		(3)	Recommended Characterization:  NIF

		(4)	Legal Consultation Date:  NIF

		(5)	Administrative Separation Board:  None

		(6)	Separation Decision Date/Characterization:  3 May 2012/Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge; the applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted rank

4.	SERVICE DETAILS:

	a.	Date/Period of Enlistment:  27 January 2010/3 years and 23 weeks

	b.	Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score:  29 years/GED Certificate/NIF

	c.	Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service:  PFC/E-3/92F10, Petroleum Supply Specialist/1 year, 7 months and 19 days
  
	d.	Prior Service/Characterizations:  None
  
	e.	Overseas Service/Combat Service:  None
  
	f.	Awards and Decorations:  GWOTSM, ASR
  
	g.	Performance Ratings:  None
  
	h.	Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record:  
  
	i.	Lost Time:  AWOL for a total of 238 days (9 September 2011 4 May 2012), mode of return unknown
  
	j.	Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health:  Radiant Health Family Medical Center document dated 17 March 2015, indicates the applicant’s major symptoms and case history were PTSD, depression, anxiety, unable to relax and forgetfulness

Transition plan and discharge summary dated 26 July 2012, shows the applicant had an Axis 1 diagnosis of a major depressive disorder (with psychotic features)

Report of Mental Status Evaluation dated 28 June 2011, indicates the applicant had an Axis 1 diagnosis of an adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct, alcohol dependence.  The applicant was not deployed to an area of combat operations and his case does not need review from the Office of the Surgeon General

DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile) dated 28 June 2011 shows the applicant had a temporary profile for an adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct, alcohol dependence

5.	APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE:  DD Form 293, Radiant Health Family Medical Center documents (seven pages); transition plan and discharge summary (two pages); Womack Army Medical Center documents (five pages); Lexi-Patient Education documents (two pages); Record of in-patient treatment/discharge instructions three pages); mental status exam (four pages); patient cumulative report (five pages); DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile); other medical documents (twenty-five pages)

6.  POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS:  None provided by the applicant





7.	REGULATORY CITATION(S):  Chapter 10 outlines procedures for separating a Soldier in lieu of trial by court-martial.  Paragraph 10-1 states a Soldier who has committed an offense or offenses, the punishment of which under the UCMJ and the Manual for Courts-Martial includes a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge, may submit a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  It also allows for such a request to be submitted after court-martial charges are preferred or where required after referral, until final action by the court-martial convening authority; or when a Soldier is under a suspended sentence of a punitive discharge.  The request does not prevent or suspend disciplinary proceedings.

Paragraph 10-8 states a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial; however, a general discharge may be directed if merited by the Soldier’s overall record during the current enlistment.

8.	DISCUSSION OF ISSUE(S):  The applicant requests an 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 the 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.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

The applicant seeks relief contending, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident during 28 months of service with no other adverse action.  The available service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline.

The applicant further contends, he feels the punishment given regarding his case was too harsh and unreasonable.  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 contention.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention he was unjustly discharged

The applicant also contends, he was a good Soldier with positive counseling statements until the incident in question.  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 additionally contends, he developed PTSD while serving the US Armed Forces.  The service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention the discharge was the result of any medical condition.

Lastly, the applicant contends, he has been discharged for three years and would like to move on to a more productive life.  The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  

The responsibility is with the applicant 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 appears 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.    Witness(es):  Yes

10.  The applicant provided the following documents:

	 Counseling statements (pages 10-50)

11.  The applicant provided no additional contentions.

12.	 BOARD ACTION DIRECTED:

a. Issue a new DD-214:    		No 

b. Change Characterization to:  	No Change
 
c. Change Reason to:  			No Change

d. SPD/RE Code Change to:  		No Change

e. Restoration to Grade:  		N/A


Authenticating Official:




COL, US ARMY
Presiding Officer 
Army Discharge Review Board








Legend:
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	 	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than  
FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	RE - Reentry	                Honorable Conditions 	

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

AR20150007623

4