1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 22 June 2015 b. Date Received: 27 July 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he is embarrassed by the mistakes that he made in his adolescence. He strives everyday with his work to be what it should have been. He wants to be able to talk proudly about his service and not be held to the mistakes he made over ten years ago. He has grown up and has become a better person and would very much appreciate the ability to express what he did accomplish, instead of his failures. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 August 2016, 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200 / Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 29 January 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 4 October 2001 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 113 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: NIF / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 3 months, 26 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait, Iraq (1 March 2003 - 16 January 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR, OSR, CIB g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 22 June 2015. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for 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. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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 specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears 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, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs. This presumption 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 in this case and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant desires a change in the reason for the discharge. However, the SPD code of “KFS” is the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged for In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge. 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 his discharge should be upgraded because he wants to be able to share with others how proud he was to serve in the military, without having to focus on his mistakes. However, the issue the applicant submitted is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. If the applicant desires a personal appearance, it is his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record. The applicant will need to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence (i.e., discharge packet) sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 August 2016, 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 SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change 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 BH – Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150012652 3