1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 13 September 2016 b. Date Received: 19 September 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, his discharge is inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in his two years of service. He was always in top physical condition and the best in his AIT class. He did not understand how much his mistakes of his younger years would affect his future. He would like to rectify his mistake. He had to change because his daughter and family depends on him. He comes from a line of military personnel in his family. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 December 2017, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service and post-service accomplishments. 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. This action entails restoration of grade to E-3/PFC. (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: 20 September 2002 c. Separation Facts: . (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 27 August 2002, the following charges were preferred, with recommendations to refer to trial by a special court-martial empowered to adjudge a bad conduct discharge: Charge I: Violation of Article 112a, UCMJ, for wrongfully using marijuana between 6 July 2002 and 7 August 2002. Charge II: three specifications of violations of Article 86, UCMJ, for absenting himself from his unit without authority on the following three separate occasions: on 10 July 2002, and remained absent until 29 July 2002; on 30 July 2002, and remained absent until 7 August 2002; and on 16 August 2002, and remained absent until 27 August 2002. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 28 August 2002 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 September 2002 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 May 2000 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 81L10, Lithographer / 2 years, 2 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Return of Absentee, dated 27 August 2002, indicates the applicant surrendered to military authorities on 27 August 2002. Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c(1). Two additional DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action) indicate the applicant's duty status changed from Present for Duty (PDY) to Confinement (military), effective 28 August 2002, and Confinement to PDY, effective 11 September 2002. The period of confinement is not reflected on his DD Form 214. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 36 days (AWOL: 30 July 2002 to 6 August 2002, for 8 days; 12 July 2002 to 28 July 2002, for 17 days; and 16 August 2002 to 26 August 2002, for 11 days) / the later AWOL period, the applicant surrendered to military authorities j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 13 September 2016; DD Form 214; and two character reference statements. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant's documentary evidence indicates that as a student in college, he is passionate, determined, and conscientious about his academic studies. 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. AR 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial." The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "KFS" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant's record of service, and 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 veteran's 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. Hrecord documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority. 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 contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire two years of service. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant contends he did not understand how the mistakes he made at a younger age would affect his future. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would help him because his family depends on him, perhaps an indication of obtaining better employment, and while in pursuance of associate of arts and baccalaureate degrees, a desire to VA education benefits. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, eligibility for veterans' benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's character and performance. However, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. In consideration of the applicant's post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 December 2017, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service and post-service accomplishments. 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. This action entails restoration of grade to E-3/PFC. 10. 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 f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: E-3/PFC 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 AR20160016576 1