1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 January 2018 b. Date Received: 23 January 2018 c. Previous Florida TP PA Hearing: 20 May 2008, AR20080003844 (Reconsideration based on new documentary evidence) d. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for discharge and its corresponding codes, including the reentry code. The applicant states, in pertinent part and in effect, is barred from reenlistment for a decision that was made at 17 years of age-the applicant was young then and did not have the maturity or knowledge the applicant has now. Leaving the Advanced Individual Training without authority was a very poor decision, which the applicant regrets every day. The applicant had a girl at the time, who told the applicant that she was pregnant with a child and indicated that she would giving up the child if the applicant was not around. The applicant was not sure what to do and made an irrational decision to leave. The applicant obtained an attorney, and followed the advice and suggestion to turn oneself in at Fort Knox. A DNA test after the baby was born proved that the applicant was not the biological father of the baby. The applicant has since tried to reenlist. The applicant feels being barred from reenlistment for life is unjust, because of age and the circumstances surrounding the discharge. The applicant has since graduated from college, owns a home, and married with a son. The applicant desires to redeem oneself. It would be an honor to clear one's name and serve the country with honor and respect. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 November 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 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 26 September 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 26 July 2007, the applicant was charged with the following: Charge: Violation of Article 86, UCMJ, for absenting himself from his unit without authority on 23 April 2007, and remained absent until 23 July 2007. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 26 July 2007 (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: 15 September 2007 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (This characterization was changed to "Uncharacterized" by the PA Board on 20 May 2008.) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 18 January 2007 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / None / 5 months, 9 days (includes 62 days of excess leave, creditable for all purpose, except pay and allowances) d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: None 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: 92 days (AWOL on 23 April 2007, and remained absent until 23 July 2007) / The applicant surrendered to military authorities. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 14 January 2018, with self-authored statement; Genetic Test Report, dated 8 November 2007; Associate of Applied Science Degree certificate; ADRB Case file (AR20080003844), dated 12 June 2008; DD Form 214; and Warranty Deed, dated 7 November 2016. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, that since his discharge, he has since graduated from college, and now owns a home and married with a son of his own. 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 a change to the narrative reason for his discharge and its corresponding codes, including the reentry code. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents 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. 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 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 on Active Duty. The applicant contends that he was young at age 17 and immature at the time of the discharge. While the record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age, there is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The applicant contends that he had family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. In consideration of the applicant's post-service accomplishments the Board can find that his accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant a change to the narrative reason for his discharge. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the review of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides a change to an unfavorable discharge 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 requests to change the reason for his separation so that he may reenlist; however, the narrative reason for his separation is governed by specific directives and as approved by the separation authority. The narrative reason specified by AR 635-5-1 for a discharge under Chapter 10 is "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial," and the separation code is KFS. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. Insofar as the applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 4. An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and 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 1 November 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 AR20180002786 1