1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 September 2017 b. Date Received: 10 October 2017 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 being able to use his VA educational benefits. He contends that he made some mistakes in the past but the mistakes he made do not define the man that he is today. He took his military career seriously, he was an E1 when he joined and made E4 in a matter of 3 years. He is a trained and disciplined. Even though he has been discharged from the military, he has continuously kept his military bearing. He has continued to better himself with the discipline that was taught to him by his chain of command and his peers. He is now asking that his discharge be upgraded so that he may continue to better himself as a man. In a records review hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 October 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 / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 26 March 2015 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: 6 March 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 March 2015 / Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 February 2012 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 12Y10, Geospatial Engineer / 3 years, 1 month, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii / None f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; and several character reference letters. 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. 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, the presumption of government regularity prevails as all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of KFS (i.e., in lieu of trial by court-martial) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. The applicant seeks relief contending that he made some mistakes in the past but the mistakes he made do not define the man that he is today. He took his military career seriously, he was an E1 when he joined and made E4 in a matter of 3 years. He is a trained and disciplined. Even though he has been discharged from the military, he has continuously kept his military bearing. He has continued to better himself with the discipline that was taught to him by his chain of command and his peers. He is now asking that his discharge be upgraded so that he may continue to better himself as a man. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, it is unknown if these contentions have merit because the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the service record. 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. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to use his VA educational benefits. However, 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 was 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 hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 October 2018, 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 AR20170017694 1