1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 1 June 2015 b. Date Received: 2 June 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, the incident that caused him not to receive an honorable discharge was an incident where he did not know some property was stolen. He had a notorious military career—he always set the example for all Soldiers in his company and gave his best every day. He overcame a leg injury. He did not quit at a training exercise and carried casualties. He took the initiative to teach new Soldiers. He was proficient in every weapon system and always scored 300 in his APFTs. Sadly, a few incidents right before Christmas 2014 destroyed his career and he was discharged. He became homeless but was able to start school. He is now running a shoe company and lives in an apartment. His situation got better and he is setting the example for the homeless veterans in San Francisco. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 August 2016, 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, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 1 May 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 April 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: willfully failing to obey a lawful order given by LTC L, a superior commissioned officer, to not leave the battalion footprint on 16 December 2014; making a false official statement to CPT G, to wit: “No, I have not given alcohol to anyone under the age of 21 at any time, to include PVT P” On 29 October 2014; and, failing to obey a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 4(b), 10th Mountain Division (LI and Fort Drum Regulation 215-1, dated 15 November 2007, by wrongfully providing alcohol to PVT P, a person under the age of 21 on 19 October 2014. (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 2 April 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 15 April 2015 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 15 April 2014 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 4 years, 11 months, and 19 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA, 15 June 2011 – 14 April 2014 / HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 5 December 2014, for wrongfully providing alcohol to a person under the age of 21 (19 October 2014) and making a false official statement (29 October 2014). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $765.00 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Negative counseling statements for violating restriction and disobeying the battalion commander. Investigator Statement to an MP Report, dated 28 December 2014, indicates the applicant was not charged for unknowingly selling stolen property. FG Article 15, dated 4 March 2015, for disobeying a lawful command (16 December 2014). The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $772.00 pay per month for two months and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Report of Mental Evaluation, dated 15 February 2015, indicates the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for administrative separation proceedings. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 1 June 2015; DD Form 214; ARCOM and AAM certificates; investigator’s statement, dated 28 December 2014; Rights Warning Procedure/Waiver Certificate, dated 16 December 2014; and Receipt for Pre-Trial/Post-Trial Prisoner or Detained Person, dated 16 December 2014. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Although the applicant became homeless, he was able to start school and he is now running a shoe company and lives in an apartment. 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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant’s record of service, and 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 contends that he was a good Soldier who always set the example. 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 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. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents that led to his discharge, and his post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his complete period of service and his accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded 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 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 5 August 2016, 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: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable 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 OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150009360 4