1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 October 2018 b. Date Received: 9 October 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from bad conduct to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was based on a mistake during seven years of service including deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. The applicant reenlisted in 2010 and all service was honorable. 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 Concussion. The applicant does not have any VA records available for review. In summary, due to the basis of separation not being in file, there is insufficient evidence to determine if the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 March 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: Court-Martial Other / AR 635-200, Chapter 3 / JJD / RE-4 / Bad-Conduct b. Date of Discharge: 4 February 2016 c. Separation Facts: NA (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NA (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NA (4) Legal Consultation Date: NA (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 February 2016 / Bad-Conduct 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 17 February 2010 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 years / HS Graduate / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19D10, Cavalry Scout / 7 years, 5 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 15 May 2008 to 16 February 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 1 November 2009 to 1 November 2010 / Afghanistan, 6 March 2012 to 15 September 2012 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, NATO MDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Military confinement for 93 days, 12 May 2015 to 15 August 2015. Applicant also had 90 days of excess, 7 November 2015 to 4 February 2016. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, (two pages), honorable discharge certificate; certificate of achievement; and a rogue hero of the week citation. 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 3, Section IV establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the ADRB to be established facts, issues relating to the applicant's innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the ADRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from bad conduct to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The Board is empowered to change the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 3, Section III, by reason of court-martial, other, with a characterization of service of bad conduct. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JJD (i.e., court-martial, other, with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. The applicant seeks relief contending, his discharge was based on a mistake during seven years of service including deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan; he reenlisted in 2010 and all his service was honorable. However, the merit of these contentions cannot be substantiated because the facts and circumstances that led to his court-martial proceedings are not contained in the available record. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it is his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. Based on the available record, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full judicial due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 March 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 AR20180014657 1