1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 22 January 2018 b. Date Received: 16 March 2018 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, his discharge was inequitable because it was unjust for him to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a under other than honorable conditions. Under current standards, he would not have received the same type of discharge. He states, his average conduct and efficiency ratings, behavior and proficiency marks were good. He had combat service and his record of promotions reflects he was generally a good Soldier. He was close to the end of his tour of duty and believes it was unfair to give him an under other than honorable conditions. He states, he has been a good citizen and has a family. His ability to serve was impaired because of his marital problems and mental health problems. His marital problems led him to substance abuse, which he recently has been led to believe that he suffers from PTSD and SUD. He believes that if he had received help from the military, rather than receiving a under other than honorable conditions discharge, then he would be a different person today. The punishment that he received at the time of his discharge was too harsh and it was more than most people received for the same offense. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, were reviewed. Because of insufficient medical documentation, no statement regarding medical mitigation can be made at this time. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 October 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, and homelessness. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (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: 9 March 2006 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 7 November 2005, the applicant was charged with violating Article 112a, UCMJ, for wrongfully using cocaine (22 August 2005). On 7 February 2006, the applicant was charged with violating Article 112a, UCMJ, for wrongfully using marijuana between 31 July and 30 August 2005. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 7 February 2006 (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: 1 March 2006 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 November 2001 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 111 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92R10, Parachute Rigger / 4 years, 4 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (12 June 2003 - 18 December 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-3, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Commonwealth of Kentucky, Uniform Citation, dated 4 December 2004, reflects the applicant was charged with speeding 76 mph in a 45 mph zone. Commonwealth vs. [the applicant], dated, 4 February 2005, reflects the applicant was charged with Alcohol Intoxication in a Public Place and Menacing - General Public, on 20 June 2004. FG Article 15, dated 26 July 2005, for wrongfully using cocaine (between 31 March and 8 April 2005). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2 (suspended); forfeiture of $692 pay per month for two months (suspended); and, extra duty for 45 days. Record Of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 1 September 2005, reflects the suspended portion of the punishment imposed on 26 July 2005, was vacated because the applicant failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 29 August 2005. Military Police Report, dated 4 September 2005, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Possession of drug Paraphernalia (On Post); Driving while License Suspended/Revoked (On Post); Disobeying a Lawful Order (Driving while Post Privileges Suspended) (On Post); Failure to Wear Seatbelt (On Post); Possession of a Controlled Substance (On Post); and, Failure to Maintain Insurance (On Post). CG Article 15, dated 6 October 2005, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty 14 September 2005). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 (suspended); forfeiture of $288 pay (suspended); extra duty and restriction for 14 days (suspended); and, an oral reprimand. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant states, he believes he suffers from PTSD or SUD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and four letters of support. 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. 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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable conditions. The applicant's record of service, 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 contends the punishment that he received at the time of his discharge was too harsh and it was more than most people received for the same offense. However, the applicant's issue does not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 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 discharge by the separation authority at the time of discharge. The applicant contends it was unfair for him to receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge, when he was so close to completing his service obligation. However, 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. Further, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant contends he may suffer from PTSD or SUD. However, the service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. 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. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow medical benefits through the VA. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include medical benefits 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 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 3 October 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, and homelessness. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20180006542 1