1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 April 2016 b. Date Received: 9 May 2016 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable; his Article 15 be set aside; and, his pay grade be restored to E-6. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the complaint that lead to his Article 15, was declared unfounded by his administrative separation board. The applicant states that he has statements and memorandums from alleged victims and witnesses that state the investigating officer in his Article 15, falsified their statements. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 July 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 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 25 April 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 16 February 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between 1 July 2015 and 11 July 2015, he maltreated and assaulted SPC X when he unlawfully touched her hair; Between 27 October 2014 and 27 November 2014, he maltreated and assaulted SPC X by unlawfully putting his arm around her shoulder; Between 27 October 2014 and 27 November 2014, he maltreated and communicated indecent language to PFC X, SPC X and PFC X; On or about 13 April 2014, he maltreated SPC G by texting her the words "Hey good looking". On 17 July 2015, he made a false official statement to 2LT X; and, Between 27 October 2014 and 11 July 2015, he was derelict in the performance of his duty, when he failed to foster a sexual harassment free environment, as it was his duty to do. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 23 February 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 26 February 2015, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 15 March 2016, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The Board found that six of the thirteen allegations were supported by a preponderance of the evidence presented. The Board found that each founded allegation warranted separation and recommended that that the applicant be discharged with characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). On 15 March 2016, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 13 April 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 30 October 2014 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 37 / Some College / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 15 years, 3 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 16 July 1996 - 15 July 2001 / HD USAR, 16 July 2001 - 4 February 2004 / HD Break in Service RA, 23 July 2008 - 30 April 2012 / HD RA, 1 May 2012 - 29 October 2014 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska, SWA / Iraq (17 June 2009 - 11 June 2010), Afghanistan (7 December 2011 - 21 November 2012), Kuwait (19 February 2015 - 16 October 2015) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, ARCOM-3, AAM-4, MUC, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-3, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: 27 August 2014 - 26 August 2015 / Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 28 August 2015, for unlawfully touching and the maltreatment of SPC X (between 1 and 11 July 2015); for unlawfully touching and the maltreatment of SPC X (between 27 October and 27 November 2014); for maltreating PFC V and SPC H (between 27 October and 27 November 2014); for orally communicating indecent language to PFC X (27 October and 27 November 2014); for maltreating SPC G (between 13 and 14 April 2015); for making false official statements to 2LT X (17 July 2015); for being derelict in the performance of his duties (between 27 October and 27 November 2014 and between 1 February and 11 July 2015). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-5; and, extra duty for 30 days. Findings and Recommendations - Commander's Inquiry, dated 12 August 2015, reflects the applicant had a long and documented history of SHARP complaints filed against him, both in his previous unit and in his current unit. He had made jokes and comments of a sexual nature to many Soldiers. He made repeated, deliberate and unwelcome advances on females and made physical contact of a sexual nature with Soldiers in the unit without their consent. His subordinates, peers and supervisors had a low opinion of his work ethic and the work climate he fosters; Counseling from the chain of command had not proven effective at eliminating those behaviors. The applicant's use of terms of endearment, and physical contact did constitute maltreatment; the applicant repeatedly made false official statements; the applicant violated General Order 1; and, the applicant's actions did not constitute sexual assault. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 7 September 2015, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with an occupational problem / Anxiety Disorder NOS (Axis I). Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 10 December 2015, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with an Occupational Problem (Axis I). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, with all allied documents listed in block 9 of the application. 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 14-12c 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." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable; his Article 15 be set aside; and, his pay grade be restored to E-6. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's request to have his Article 15 set aside and to have his pay grade restored to E-6, do not fall within the purview of this Board. These requests are being considered under a separate Board action by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). The applicant will be notified of their decision by separate correspondence from the ABCMR. 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 on Active Duty. The applicant contends that the complaint that lead to his Article 15 and which served as the basis for his discharge was determined to be unfounded by his administrative separation board. However, 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. Further, the administrative separation board found that six of the thirteen allegations were supported by a preponderance of the evidence presented; and, that those offenses warranted separation from service. Additionally, the administrative separation board does not have the authority to set aside or overturn punishment imposed under Article 15 of the UCMJ. 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 21 July 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 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 AR20170003590 4