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, he served honorably the first 15 years of his military career. He made a judgment error that led to his discharge. Since his discharge, he has an impeccable record. He has been employed with the Smithsonian Institution and received outstanding job appraisals for his performance. He is now seeking further employment. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had no mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses. The Active Duty electronic medical records were reviewed. 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: 7 March 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 25 January 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: violating paragraph 4-14b(3), AR 600-20, dated 18 March 2008, by wrongfully soliciting funds from junior enlisted Soldiers; committing spouse abuse on 11 March 2011; and committing domestic violence on 26 May 2011. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge by the unit commander and General, Under Honorable Conditions by the battalion commander (4) Legal Consultation Date: 1 February 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: Waived, 1 February 2012 (contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions) (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 15 February 2012 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 15 February 2008 / NIF (5 years, according to ERB and commander’s forwarding memorandum) b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 24 / Associate’s Degree / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-6 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 15 years, 6 months, 17 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA, 21 August 1996 – 11 March 1999 / HD           RA, 12 March 1999 – 30 December 2003 / HD           RA, 31 December 2003 – 14 February 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Hawaii, Korea, SWA / Iraq (10 February 2009 – 12 March 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AAM-5; AGCM-4; NDSM; ICM-CS; GWTSM KDSM; NPDR; ASR; OSR-3 g. Performance Ratings: 31 January 2008 – 30 January 2009, Marginal 1 February 2009 – 30 January 2011, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: MP Report, dated 12 March 2011, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for spouse abuse and simple assault. MP Report, dated 26 May 2011, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for domestic violence and spouse abuse. Negative counseling statements for being recommended for an involuntary separation; violating Article 92, UCMJ; failing to follow a regulation by soliciting funds from lower enlisted Soldiers; being arrested for larceny of private property; MP Report, dated 22 September 2011, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for larceny of private property, failing to obey a lawful order, FG Article 15, dated 7 November 2011, for violating AR 600-20 by wrongfully soliciting funds from junior enlisted Soldiers on 22 September 2011, and wrongfully appropriating $160, property of junior enlisted Soldiers on 22 September 2011. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $1,162 pay per month for two months (suspended); 30 days of extra duty, and an oral reprimand. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 22 December 2011, indicates the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated 7 December 2011, indicates the applicant noted behavioral health issues. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, dated 1 June 2015, with a self-authored statement; DD Form 214; and Employee Performance Plan and Appraisal for report ending 30 September 2014. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant has been employed with the Smithsonian Institution and received outstanding job appraisals for his performance. 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. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members’ discharges. “Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre-existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service.” “Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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 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 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. The applicant has expressed his desire to seek further employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Although the applicant did not raise behavioral health issues, the record indicates the applicant noted behavioral health symptoms. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. 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 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 AR20150009670 5