1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 January 2019 b. Date Received: 15 January 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he is making effort pay debt and is trying to obtain a career, but he is limited by mistakes from the past. The sexual assault and larceny charges were dropped and he was never charged. 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), the applicant had multiple FAP cases and ASAP encounters while in-service with a diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder and offender of IPV. Post- service, the VA has listed PTSD, Bipolar Disorder, Depression, Personality Disorder, and MST. However, the VA has not service connected the applicant for any behavioral health conditions. While liberal consideration was applied based on the MST, this only partially mitigates the basis for separation - his FTR. Stealing, threatening, and damaging government property are not mitigated. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that mitigates part of the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. Ultimately, the level of misconduct does not outweigh mitigation due to alleged MST. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 22 January 2021, 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 8 April 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 24 February 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between on or about 23 May 2013, and on or about 31 May 2015, he stole monies, military property, of a value of more than $500.00, the property of the U.S. Army; and, On or about 10 February 2016, he communicated a threat to a Commissioned Officer, damaged government property and failed to report to his appointed place of duty. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 February 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 28 February 2016, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 March 2016 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 February 2013 / 2 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / HS Graduate / 108 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B10, Infantryman / 10 years, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 5 April 2006 - 26 October 2008 / HD RA, 27 October 2008 - 12 February 2013 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Afghanistan (3 September 2010 - 7 January 2011 / 6 May 2013 - 14 January 2014) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, ARCOM, AAM-7, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 1 December 2012 - 30 November 2013 / Fully Capable 1 December 2013 - 30 November 2014 / Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Law Enforcement Report - Final, dated 27 July 2015, reflects an investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offenses of Larceny of Government Funds and False Official Statement, when following his divorce, he continued to receive BAH for dependents he no longer had, signed official documents indicating he was still married, and subsequently provided a false statement concerning the details of his actions. FG Article 15, dated 14 December 2015, for stealing monies, military property, of a value of more than $500, the property Army (between 23 May 2013 and 31 May 2015). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4; forfeiture of $1,225 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 16 December 2015, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 149; Congressional Inquiry; Law Enforcement Report. 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 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. Paragraph 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that 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 contends the charges against him were dropped and was never convicted of any charge. 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. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 22 January 2021, 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 / 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 AR20190000587 1