1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 23 July 2015 b. Date Received: 27 July 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, if given a second chance it would really change his life and his family. He contends he served his complete period of service and was not relieved any sooner or later. During his period of service he was an outstanding Soldier, 300 APFT, two ARCOM’s, ARCOM with valor (in Kandahar City, Afghanistan), Air Assault, and more as noted on his ERB. He served his country with honor and understands he broke curfew in Korea; however, after his tour in Afghanistan it really affected him mentally and he really lost interest in the Army, his family, and everything he did but with time and counseling he has been progressing. Per the Board’s Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant had no mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. Mental Status exam completed 23 October 2013 in which he denied any behavioral health symptoms and was psychiatrically cleared. Screened negative for PTSD. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 28 September 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was too harsh and inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 February 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 20 December 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: violated the USFK Curfew Policy (5 May 2013); violated the 55th MP Co Barracks Policy by failing to sign in and out of the barracks (5 May 2013); violated the 55th MP Co Barracks Policy again by failing to sign in and out of the barracks and then making a false official statement regarding his whereabouts (1 September 2013); and, violated the 55th MP Co Barracks Policy for the third time by failing to sign in and out of the barracks (13 and 14 September 2013), in addition to violating the barracks policy by breaking restriction (13 September 2013). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 28 January 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 5 February 2009 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 92 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-5 / 31B10, Military Police / 5 years d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Afghanistan (10 August 2010 – 6 August 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-V Device, ARCOM-2, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, OSR-2, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NIF h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 25 July 2013, for having knowledge of a lawful order, issued by CPT R.T.S., to wit: paragraph 3(f)(13), 55th Military Police Company Barracks Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), dated 31 August 2012, an order which was his duty to obey, did, at or near Camp Casey, Republic of Korea (4 May 2013 and 5 May 2013), failed to obey the same by wrongfully failing to sign the Charge of Quarters roster when he left the building and violating a lawful general order, to wit: paragraph 4, General Order Regarding Off-Installation Curfew, dated 14 January 2013, by wrongfully being off a US military installation during curfew hours without proper authorization (5 May 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $1,201.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), 30 days extra duty and restriction and oral reprimand. Two DA Forms 4856 (Developmental Counseling), dated 1 September 2013 and 4 September 2013, reference notification of intent to separate from the United States Army i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 23 July 2015; AGCM certificates; completion of Warrior Leader Course; promotion orders to E-5; letter of appreciation from Deputy Minister of Interior for Security Afghanistan; certificate of achievement; and Enlisted Record Brief, dated 15 January 2014. 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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, the documents and the issues submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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 contends he served his complete period of service and was not relieved any sooner or later. Evidence in the record shows the applicant was discharged on his ETS date; however, it is also noted the applicant’s discharge was approved on 28 January 2014 which was prior to his ETS date. The applicant contends during his period of service he was an outstanding Soldier, scoring 300 on the APFT, two ARCOMs, ARCOM with valor (in Kandahar City, Afghanistan), Air Assault, and more as noted on his ERB. He served his country with honor and understands he broke curfew in Korea. 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 and the applicant is to be commended for his service. Also by regulation, an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of a pattern of misconduct. It appears the applicant’s generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge. The also contends he was affected mentally after his tour to Afghanistan. However, the service record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service. The applicant has expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of receiving a second chance at changing his life and his family. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 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 28 September 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was too harsh and inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 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 AR20150012643 5