1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 12 January 2012 b. Date Received: 23 January 2018 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 or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the discharge should be upgraded based on post-service activity. The applicant accepts full responsibility for the actions that led to discharge and is totally aware that the applicant made a poor judgement call as a father, husband and a Soldier, resulting in being separated from what the applicant loved and cared about the most. Being a Soldier in the United States Army was by far one of the greatest accomplishments in life and one of the things the applicant is most proud of. The applicant asks that the board find leniency the applicant and family when making their decision. 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 Acute Reaction to Stress, Bereavement, Alcohol Disorder, FAP Involvement, and Adjustment Disorder. The applicant does not currently have a service-connected rating from the VA. 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 1 April 2020, 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: Misconduct (Civil Conviction) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-5, Sec II / JKB / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 9 November 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: NIF; however, the unit commander's recommendation memorandum indicates that on 24 February 2012, the applicant plead guilty to and was convicted of Sexual Battery by the Superior Court of the State of Georgia. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 20 July 2012, the separation authority denied the applicant's request for a conditional waiver for a general (under honorable conditions) discharge and directed that an administrative separation board be convened. On 14 August 2012 and again on 10 September 2012, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board. On 19 September 2012, the administrative separation board convened. The board, having carefully considered the evidence before it, found the allegations in the notification of proposed separation, were supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The findings did warrant separation with respect to the applicant. In view of the findings, the board recommended that the applicant be separated from the US Army with an under other than honorable characterization of service. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 25 October 2012, the separation authority having carefully considered the separation packet, the recommendation of the chain of command, and findings and recommendation of the administrative Separation board, that the applicant be considered for separation from the Army prior to the expiration of the current term of service, under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-5, directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions and that the applicant be reduced to the rank of Private (E-1). The applicant was ineligible for transfer to the IRR. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 5 July 2007 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 115 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M1P, Motor Transport Operator / 7 years, 2 months, 9 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 7 September 2005 to 4 July 2007 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (13 March 2007 to 15 October 2007 and 1 July 2009 to 1 February 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWTSM, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: DD Form 4187 (Personnel Action Form) changing the applicant's duty status from "Present for Duty" to "Confinement," effective 27 October 2011; service member was confined by civilian authorities. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; letters of support; and court document from the Superior Court of Muscogee County State of Georgia 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contents that since his discharge he has not been in any trouble, has been a full time father and held employment, maintained his current employment for more than two years without any disciplinary actions or restrictions whatsoever; has remarried, filed for and was granted full custody of his children and dedicated his all to being the best man possible for his family. Part of that has been trying to pursue a better career and his current characterization of service had made that possibility incredibly difficult, thus placing a burden on himself and his family. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 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, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. 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 or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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 Army, 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 on Active duty. The applicant seeks relief contending that his discharge should be upgraded based on his post- service activity. The applicant contends that he accepts full responsibility for the actions that led to his discharge and is totally aware that he made a poor judgement call as a father, husband and a Soldier, resulting in him being separated from what he loved and cared about the most. Being a Soldier in the United States Army was by far one of his greatest accomplishments in life and one of the things he is most proud of. He ask that the board find leniency on him and his family when making their decision. The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishment. However, the service record indicates the applicant committed a discrediting offense, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 April 2020, 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 AR20180003327 1