1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 1 June 2016 b. Date Received: 17 June 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). The applicant submitted no issues of propriety or equity to be considered by the Board. The record indicates that applicant had a prior records review conducted on 20 August 2010, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant offers a personal data sheet from 9 November 2004 to raise mitigation of his misconduct that led to his other than honorable discharge. His evidence is a record that notes diagnoses of Depression and Marijuana dependence. Based on available evidence, his diagnoses are non-mitigating for his misconduct. The available electronic medical records from the Army and the VA via the Joint Legacy View show no records of the patient having any mental-health diagnoses. The applicant provided one piece of evidence, but it contained no remarks on the applicant’s symptoms, their onset, their duration, or degree of functional impairment. The evidence provided is insufficient to justify mitigating misconduct. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 December 2016, 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, to include his combat service, his personal testimony, circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. severe life stressors), and his in-service OBH diagnosis 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 general (under honorable conditions). 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 7 December 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): NIF (2) Legal Consultation Date: 12 April 2010 (3) Basis for Separation: NIF (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 24 November 2004 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions It should also be noted, the applicant was issued a memorandum subject “Bar Letter,” which informed the applicant that he was permanently barred from entry onto all United States Government controlled property and facilities under the jurisdictions of the Commanding General, United States Army, Europe. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 21 November 2002 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 26 / HS Graduate / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-5 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 6 years, 3 months, 26 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA, 12 August 1998 to 20 November 2002 / HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA, Germany / Kosovo (29 October 2000 to 2 May 2001) and Kuwait / Iraq (3 March 2003 to 31 October 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KOSCM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: October 2001 thru September 2002, Among The Best October 2002 thru February 2003, Among The Best March 2003 thru June 2003, Among The Best July 2003 thru October 2003, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 14 June 2003, for assaulting another Soldier while in Iraq (6 June 2003). The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $444.00 pay, extra duty for 7 days, restriction for 14 days, and a written reprimand. FG Article 15, dated 9 October 2003, for disobeying a lawful order from a senior noncommissioned officer (6 September 2003) and communicating a threat to another Soldier (6 September 2003). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $874.65 pay (suspended), and a verbal reprimand. Negative counseling statement for his disrespectful behavior towards the CSM. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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. 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 honorable. The applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 be retained on active duty. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents several acts of significant achievement and valor; however, it did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of his discharge. 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 applicant submitted no issues of propriety or equity to be considered by the Board. 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. DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 December 2016, 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, to include his combat service, his personal testimony, circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. severe life stressors), and his in-service OBH diagnosis 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 general (under honorable conditions). The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 11. 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 SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board 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 AR20160011833 4