1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 22 September 2016 b. Date Received: 3 October 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 was awarded 100 percent disability benefits. He wants to attend school, earn a degree, get his life on the right path and have a career. He served his country to the best of his capabilities; his performance was outstanding in training and actions. He received a general (under honorable conditions) discharged because an officer in his company told him he did not deserve any benefits. He was discharged when his Medical Evaluation Board paperwork had already been forwarded for decision and he was discharged before the process was completed. Since his discharge he has improved and changed in the last three yearss; he will be a father soon and want to be an example and guide for his child. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant had a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the reasons leading to an early separation. In summary, although SM did not exhibit psychosis during his time in service, he misconduct is best attributed to likely having prodromal symptoms of a psychotic disorder which can be associated with unsatisfactory performance, disorganization, and misconduct such as disobeying orders. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 December, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, and in-service and post-service diagnosis of OBH issues. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unsatisfactory Performance / AR 635- 200, Chapter 13 / JHJ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 22 March 2013 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 26 November 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; on divers occasions, he failed to report to his appointed place of duty, disobeyed a commissioned officer, and he was disrespectful to a non-commissioned officer. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 December 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) / the separation approving authority reviewed the separation packet, the finding and the completed Medical Evaluation Board. He found that the disability was not the cause, or substantial contributing cause, of the misconduct and no other circumstances warrant disability processing instead of alternate administrative separation. He directed his case not be processed through medical disability channels. He further directed that the applicant be separated from the US Army with general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 January 2011 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / HS Graduate / 84 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 89A10, Ammunition Stock Control And Accounting Specialist / 2 years, 6 months, 7 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 19 September 2010 to 5 January 2011 / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant received numerous negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None 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 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases. 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, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because of unsatisfactory performance which 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 either the command's action was erroneous or the applicant's service mitigated the duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, he was awarded 100 percent disability benefits. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was awarded 100 percent disability benefits. The applicant further contends, he wants to attend school, earn a degree, get his life on the right path and have a career. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The applicant also contends, he served his country to the best of his capabilities; his performance was outstanding in training and actions. 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 additionally contends, he received a general (under honorable conditions) discharged because an officer in his company told him he did not deserve any benefits. 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. Furthermore, the applicant contends, he was discharged after his Medical Evaluation Board paperwork had been forwarded for decision and he was discharged before the process was completed. The separation approving authority reviewed the separation packet and determined that his disability was not the cause, or substantial contributing cause of the misconduct and no other circumstances warranted disability processing instead of administrative separation. Lastly, the applicant contends, since his discharge he has improved and changed in the last three years; he will be a father soon and want to be an example and guide for his child. The applicant is to be commended for his efforts. However, this contention is not a matter which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. 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 13 December, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, and in-service and post-service diagnosis of OBH issues. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 AR20160016947 2