1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 April 2016 b. Date Received: 25 April 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 honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of obtaining better employment and going back to school. The applicant contends for four years without incident he went from training at Fort Leonard Wood, MO to his first assignment at Fort Lewis, through a deployment to Iraq, and then initially ending in Stuttgart, Germany. Problems did not start until he was select to transfer to the EUCOM PSD Unit within a month of his entering Germany. He believes he was repeatedly harassed by members of his chain of command and CID with continuous attempts to interfere with his personal and family life. When he requested video proof of his whereabouts his chain of command put him on restriction. He also believes because the military wanted to slim down on the amount of troops in the service it was a likely time that all claims made against him outweighed the proof of his where about as well as his supporting statement from fellow Soldiers verifying his quality as a person and Soldier. In a Travel Panel Hearing conducted at Scott AFB, IL on 26 February 2018, 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 / NA / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 15 October 2013 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: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 May 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 115 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 31B10, Military Police / 5 years, 5 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (25 December 2009 to 29 July 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, NOPDR, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Court-Martial Order Number 1, dated 8 January 2014, makes reference to the accused (applicant) having been arraigned, the proceeding were terminated on 3 October 2013 because the accused (applicant) requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, which was approved on 9 October 2013, with issuance of a discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The charges and their specification were dismissed. All rights, privileges, and property of which the accused (applicant) had been deprived by virtue of these proceedings were to be restored. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and DD Form 214. 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 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. 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 under other than 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 authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, by reason of "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial," with a characterization of service of under other than 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 for four years without incident he went from training at Fort Leonard Wood, MO to his first assignment at Fort Lewis, through a deployment to Iraq, and then initially ending in Stuttgart, Germany. Problems did not start until he was select to transfer to the EUCOM PSD Unit within a month of his entering Germany. He believes he was repeatedly harassed by member of his chain of command and CID with continuous attempts to interfere with his personal and family life. When he requested video proof of his whereabouts his chain of command put him on restriction. He also believes because the military wanted to slim down on the amount of troops in the service it was a likely time that all claims made against him outweighed the proof of his where about as well as his supporting statement from fellow Soldiers verifying his quality as a person and Soldier. The applicant's contentions were noted; 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 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. It is the applicant's responsibility 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. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of obtaining better employment and going back to school. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, eligibility for veteran's 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. 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): None were listed on the hearing data sheet. b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None were listed on the hearing data sheet. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a Travel Panel Hearing conducted at Scott AFB, IL on 26 February 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a new DD-214/Issue new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160008609 5