1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 8 February 2016 b. Date Received: 8 March 2016 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, his discharge was unjust because he has seen other Soldiers with serious misconduct who received honorable discharges. He has never received a negative counseling statement in his three and a half years of service. He received an AGCM at three years, he was awarded an AAM, and just prior to his discharge, and he was presented a plaque in honor of his service by his platoon. He and his wife were dual military parents, with a nine-month-old daughter. Their Family Care Plan fell through and they were unable to find another capable, trustworthy caretaker. At the time of the notification of his separation, he was informed that he was being recommended for an honorable discharge; therefore, he waived his legal rights. He was an outstanding Soldier who would never do anything to waste his three plus years of service. He is continuing his public service and would be attending the VA Police Academy. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 May 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, and circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. no misconduct, command recommended HD), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Parenthood / AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-8 / JDG / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 6 January 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (However, according to the applicant's documentary evidence, "1BCT Legal Action Request Form," signed by the unit commander, it shows the request was for a paragraph 5-8 administrative separation due to "Family Care Plan," and with a honorable discharge.) (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 July 2012 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / HS Graduate / 119 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 68W10, Health Care Specialist / 3 years, 5 months, 6 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: There is no record of any negative counseling statement or action under the UCMJ. The applicant was discharged at the rank of SPC/E-4. Discharge Orders, dated 14 December 2015 i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Legal Action Request Form for administrative discharge with an honorable discharge; plaque (illegible); and AGCM certificate. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is continuing his public service and would be attending the VA Police Academy. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-8 provides that a Soldier may be separated when parental obligations interfere with fulfillment of military responsibilities. Specific reasons for separation because of parenthood include inability to perform prescribed duties satisfactorily, repeated absenteeism, late for work, inability to participate in field training exercises or perform special duties such as CQ and Staff Duty NCO, and non-availability for worldwide assignment or deployment according to the needs of the Army. Unless the reason for separation requires a specific characterization, a Soldier being separated for the convenience of the government will be awarded a character of service of honorable, general (under honorable conditions) or an uncharacterized description of service, if in entry- level status. No Soldier will be awarded a characterization of service under honorable conditions under this Chapter unless the Soldier is notified, using the notification procedure, of the specific factors in his/her service record that warrant such a characterization. 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, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-1b, states that no Soldier will be awarded a character of service of general (under honorable conditions) under this Chapter, unless the Soldier is notified of the specific factors in the service record that warrants such a characterization, using the notification procedure. However, there is no record available to confirm whether the applicant was properly notified as to any specific aggravating factor(s), which would warrant a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Accordingly, the applicant's record is void of the specific 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 digitally authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-8, by reason of "Parenthood," with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, it is unknown if these contentions have merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the service record. The burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the discharge packet is not available in the official record. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to his discharge, and his post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his complete period of service, based on the available record and accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The applicant contends that other Soldiers with serious offenses received honorable discharges. However, the method in which another Soldier's case was handled is not relevant to the applicant's case. Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case. Based on 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 19 May 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, and circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. no misconduct, command recommended HD), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20160005789 3