1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 April 2016 b. Date Received: 19 April 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he believes he made desirable expectation of getting his discharge upgraded due to receiving VA compensations. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 July 2017, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 7 July 2015 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 June 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he failed to report to his proper place of duty on multiple occasions; he disrespected a noncommissioned officer; and he failed to obey a lawful order. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 June 2015, the applicant waived his right to consult with counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 22 June 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 April 2014 / 3 years, 26 weeks / block 12a on the applicant DD Form 214 dated entered active duty this period, is incorrect and should read as annotated in the Case Report and Directive. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / HS Graduate / 97 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 91C10, Utilities Equipment Repairer / 1 year, 2 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15 dated, 22 April 2015, for being AWOL x2 (12 March 2015 to 30 March 2015) and (29 January 2015 to 30 January 2015); without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty x2 (13 February 2015 and 12 February 2015); disrespectful in language toward SGT D.S., a non-commissioned officer, who was then in the execution of his office, by saying to him, "I'm not in the mood for PT," or words to at effect (19 February 2015); and having knowledge of a lawful order issued by 1SG J.G., not to go to Atlanta, Georgia until his four day pass was approved, an order which it was his duty to obey, did fail to obey the same by wrongfully leaving the motor pool about 1200 hours and going to Atlanta, Georgia (29 January 2015); reduction to PVT / E-1 and extra duty for 45 days. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 18 days (12 March 2015 to 29 March 2015); mode of return unknown. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages). 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 allows for separation for misconduct with paragraph 14-1 allowing for separating personnel because of minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, or absence without leave. Paragraph 14-2 states action will be taken to separate a Soldier for misconduct when it is clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him/her as a Soldier further effort is not likely to succeed; rehabilitation is impracticable or the Soldier is not amenable to rehabilitation. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service and the issues submitted with his 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. By the documented pattern of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, he believes he made desirable expectation of getting his discharge upgraded due to receiving VA compensations. 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 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 27 July 2017, 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 Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20160008458 1