1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 11 June 2015 b. Date Received: 15 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 effect, that he has missed out on many career opportunities and the financial burdens that he has on his shoulders. He contends that he made minor infractions in the military but has since made major changes in his life, relocated to a new state, changed his mind set, associates himself with different individuals, and looks out for others instead of just looking out for himself. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 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 (Minor Infractions) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12a / JKN / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions. b. Date of Discharge: 14 May 2010 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 15 April 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant had multiple instances of failing to report and failing to obey a noncommissioned officer. (3) Recommended Characterization: General, Under Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 April 2010 (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 29 April 2010 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 17 December 2007 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 117 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-4 / 25L10, Cable System Installer-Maintainer / 5 years, 8 months, and 13 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA, 2 September 2004 - 16 December 2007 /HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA, Korea / Iraq (19 September 2007 – 20 November 2008) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWTSM, KDSM, ICM–w/CS, ASR, OSR-2 g. Performance Ratings: N/A h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 23 July 2009, for failing to go at the time prescribe to his appointed place of duty on 12 May 2009 and disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer on 5 May 2009. The punishment received was not annotated on the document. Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 7 April 2010, which indicated the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings and was mentally responsible. The applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI IAW OTSG/MEDCOM Policy Memo 08-018, with negative results. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. Several DA Forms 4856 (Developmental Counseling), dated between 30 March 2007 and 7 January 2010, for reception and integration counseling, performance counseling, family care plan/failing to maintain, failure to report, pattern of substandard Soldiering on several occasions, promotion requirements, duties and responsibilities, professional growth, failure to maintain his Class A uniform, endangering his life and putting another Soldier in a dangerous situation, and his financial responsibilities. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 11 June 2015, and DD Form 214. 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 14-12a addresses minor disciplinary infractions, defined as a pattern of misconduct, consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. 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, 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. The applicant contends that he made minor infractions in the military but has since made major changes in his life. The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishments. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of improving his career and financial opportunities. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 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 31 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/Issue a New Separation Order: 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: No Change 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 AR20150010524 1