1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 16 December 2017 b. Date Received: 21 December 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, served honorably and faithfully for over five years as a Soldier and accomplished many tasks. The applicant remained ethical and adhered to the Army Values. As a Noncommissioned Officer, the First Sergeant selected the applicant over 41 other NCOs to be the unit Combined Federal Campaign Representative. For the applicant's extensive selfless service and dedication, the Brigade Commander upgraded a PCS award to a Meritorious Service Medal (MSM). Being accountable to the Army Substance Abuse Program resulted in the applicant being hand selected as the Unit Prevention Leader. The applicant was also appointed as the unit Reenlistment NCO. With that opportunity, many Soldiers were capable of advancing their military career. The applicant consistently maintained above 90 percent in each APFT event. The applicant's high standards resulted in being appointed to implement the unit physical training program. Soldiers increased their scores by an average of 20 points. For the applicant's hard work and dedication, the applicant was hand-selected by the Brigade CSM to attend the Drill Sergeant School, the epitome of what an NCO should bestow. Although the applicant excelled in the training and graduated, the assignment as a Drill Sergeant at Fort Jackson as a single parent ruined what the applicant had worked extremely hard for. When the applicant engaged in a personal relationship with a Soldier, who was previously the applicant's Soldier, the applicant's career spiraled very quickly. Although, the Soldier, at the time, was no longer the applicant's Soldier, the applicant is fully aware that the actions were improper. The Soldier was stationed at another duty station for Advanced Individual Training. The request for character references from superiors allowed the applicant to remain hopeful, because the applicant was in trouble for a single offense, although it was major. Requesting in lieu of court-martial allowed the humiliation, embarrassment, and brainless decision to diminish slightly by avoiding further consequences. Since discharge, the applicant has remained fully competent with the assistance of anti-depressants that helped with obtaining greater achievements and remaining resilient. The applicant used the GI Bill and graduated with honors from a University with an Associate's Degree in Liberal Arts, Pre Social Work. Upon graduating and desiring to further a career, the applicant was accepted into the Bachelor Program at a State University. The applicant recently accomplished that goal by receiving a Bachelor's Degree in Social Work with a minor in Psychology. The applicant's current focus is graduating in May 2018 with a Master's in Social Work with a concentration in Addictions. Moving forward as a student, the applicant plans to continue using the values, resiliency, motivation, and dedication to others in the community. The applicant realizes making a mistake. However, on an equity basis of the UOTHC discharge for a single offense, the applicant is requesting an upgrade. The character references while serving, provide insight on the applicant's character. One situation for lack of judgment has altered many opportunities for advancement. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Depression, Anxiety Disorder NOS, and Adjustment Disorder. The applicant does not have any VA records for review. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 30 October 2019, and by a 4-1 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: 3 September 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 12 July 2013, the applicant was charged with the following: Charge: Violation of Article 92, UCMJ, for violating a lawful general regulation between 26 April 2013 and 16 May 2013, by wrongfully engaging in a prohibited relationship with PV2 D.T.F., a Soldier in Training. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 19 August 2013 (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: The unit and battalion commanders recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) and the brigade commander recommended Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 August 2013 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 July 2011 / 3 years, but extended reenlistment to 3 years, 7 months on 21 August 2012. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / 13 years / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 92A1X, Automated Logistical Specialist / 6 years, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (22 August 2007 to 30 June 2011) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (2 July 2008 to 8 June 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: MSM; ARCOM-2; AAM; AGCM; NDSM; ICM-CS; GWOTSM; NCOPDR-2; ASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: 1 February 2011 thru 31 January 2012, Among the Best 1 February 2012 thru 14 December 2012, Among the Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c(1) with its associated investigative documents. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; DD Form 214; two NCOERs; separation authority's decision memorandum, dated 26 August 2013; Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, dated 19 August 2013; unit/battalion commander's recommendations; applicant-authored memorandum to separation authority; two character reference/supporting statements; MSM certificate with recommendation for award; SJA's pretrial advice; charge sheet; Associate of Arts certificate; and Bachelor of Arts certificate. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, that since her discharge, she graduated with honors from a University with an Associate's Degree in Liberal Arts, Pre Social Work, and she has received her Bachelor's Degree in Social Work with a minor in Psychology. 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. 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 her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with her 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. 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 she indicated she understood she 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. Her record documents no other 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 or poor duty performance, such that she should have been retained on Active Duty. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of her service prior to the incidents of misconduct, and her post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that her accomplishments and complete period of service were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of her characterization of service. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re- characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. The applicant contends she has remained competent with the assistance of anti-depressants helping her with her achievements and remaining resilient. Although the applicant related to having behavioral health issues, the service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be her responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., behavioral health issue(s) diagnosis), for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance and character. However, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. The applicant contends her current discharge based on one situation for lack of judgment has altered many opportunities for her advancements. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Insofar as the applicant contends that the incident that caused her discharge was the only one in her entire Army career, although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of her service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 30 October 2019, and by a 4-1 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 AR20180000295 3