1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 February 2017 b. Date Received: 6 February 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, since discharge, has established oneself with an employment, own place and car. The applicant has not violated any laws and does not do drugs, nor drinks. The applicant attends counseling. The applicant desires to reenlist, if given another chance. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 May 2019, 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: NA / AR 135-178 / NA / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 9 May 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 2October 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to AR 135-178, Paragraph 12-1c (Misconduct- Commission of a Serious Offense), the applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 11 October 2012, the applicant was arrested for attempting to have sexual intercourse with a child who he thought was 14 years of age. His actions were considered serious misconduct as the offense warranted discharge and a punitive discharge would be authorized for the same or closely related offense under the UCMJ, to wit: Article 80, attempted aggravated sexual abuse of a child. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 November 2012 (Applicant's mother by Power-of- Attorney acknowledged and made the election of rights on his behalf.) (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 13 April 2013, the board recommended an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 3 May 2013 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 June 2010 / Transferred from ARNG 6-year enlistment to USAR, or until 14 October 2014) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 31 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13M10, Multiple Launch Rocket System and High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (MLRS/HIMARS) Crewmember / 7 years, 1 month, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (30 July 1996 to 5 March 1999) / GD ARNG (15 October 2008 to 31 May 2010) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The Findings and Recommendations Worksheet with Report of Proceedings by Board of Officers and summarized transcript and its associated civilian court affidavits indicate that on 13 April 2013, an administrative separation board recommended the applicant's separation from military service with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service for a serious misconduct-commission of a service offense for solicitation of a child to perform sexual action. Discharge Orders i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 3 February 2017. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, since his discharge, he has been employed. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. Chapter 12 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. 2. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. 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 and the issues submitted with his 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 US Army Reserve, 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 have been retained in the US Army Reserve. In consideration of the applicant's quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, and his post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his complete period of service and accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The applicant requests a change to the characterization of his service in order to rejoin the Army. However, at the time of discharge, the applicant received an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Army Regulation 601-280 stipulates that an under other than honorable conditions discharge constitutes a non-waivable disqualification, thus the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 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 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 15 May 2019, 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 Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code 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 AR20170003078 1