1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 October 2017 b. Date Received: 13 November 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, an upgrade would allow receipt of educational and health care benefits so that the applicant may provide for the family. The applicant maintained innocence throughout the process of the court-martial charges. The applicant completely understands that these actions led to the decisions that were made, but has many witnesses and references, who would testify that the accusations against the applicant were far from normal behavior. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 August 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: 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 October 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 25 May 2016, the following charges were preferred for trial by a General Court-Martial: Charge I: Violation of Article 81, UCMJ: The Specification: Between 14 October 2014, and 27 January 2015, the applicant conspired with SPC M.T.R. to commit a premeditated murder of the applicant's spouse. Charge II: two specifications of violating Article 134, UCMJ: Specification 1: On diver's occasions between 14 October 2014, and 27 January 2015, the applicant wrongfully solicited SPC M.T.R. to murder the applicant's spouse, by offering monies in exchange for the murder of Ms. D.B., such conduct was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Specification 2: On 26 January 2015, the applicant wrongfully endeavored to impede an investigation, by offering to SPC D.A.O., the sum of $10,000, if SPC D.A.O. would not report the applicant's conspiracy with SPC M.T.R. to murder the applicant's spouse, such conduct was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 27 September 2016 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 September 2016 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 October 2014 (NIF, but according to the applicant's DD Form 214) / NIF (However, the applicant's ERB indicates an ETS date of 11 December 2016) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS Graduate / 120 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 68W10, Health Care Specialist / 4 years, 3 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (12 June 2012 to 13 October 2014) / HD (per DD Form 214) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (6 March 2014 to 18 June 2014) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2; AGCM; NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR; NATO MDL; CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c(1). i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 4 October 2017, and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. Further, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record during the current enlistment. (See chap 3, section II.) However, for Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper, and when characterization of service under other than honorable conditions is not warranted for a Soldier in entry-level status, service will be uncharacterized. 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and document submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. On 27 September 2016, the applicant, in consultation with legal counsel voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and he indicated he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor, and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general (under honorable conditions) discharge by the separation authority at the time of discharge. 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, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill and health care. However, eligibility for veterans' 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. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because he maintained his innocence throughout the process of allegations and that they were far from his character observed by many witnesses and references. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the 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 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 16 August 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 AR20170019247 3