1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 28 October 2015 b. Date Received: 3 November 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 and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 14 years and 2 months of service with no other adverse action. The separation authority made the decision to separate him based on the false belief that he pleaded guilty to a felony involving sexual misbehavior with a child. The narrative reason for his separation is inequitable because he was never charged with a felony. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 June 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board noted an administrative error on the applicant's DD Form 214 and directed the following change according to the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, which shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3, change block 27, reentry code to 3. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-4 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 12 June 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 November 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: From 18 June 2014 to 19 June 2014, the applicant intentionally used a computer or computer network and email or internet messaging system or other electronic media device to solicit, lure, entice, or attempt to solicit, lure, or entice a child or other person he believed to be a child to engage in any conduct that by its nature was an unlawful sexual offense against a child and did travel to meet said child in an effort to further his actions. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 12 November 2014 and 15 January 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: 13 March 2015, the board recommended a General, Under Honorable Conditions (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 7 May 2015 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 26 May 2008 (NIF, based off of Oath of Extension of Enlistment, dated 19 January 2012) / initially for 6 years, was extended on 19 January 2012, to a period of 7 years and 8 months b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 27 / HS Graduate / 113 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-6 / 68W30, Health Care Specialist / 16 years, 11 months, and 3 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: DEP       (28 July 1997 - 9 July 1998) / NA RA          (10 July 1998 – 9 July 2002) / HD           ARNG     (10 July 2002 – 5 December 2004) / NA           MOB/AD (6 December 2004 – 28 June 2006) / HD           ARNG     (29 June 2006 – 1 November 2006) / NIF           RA          (2 November 2006 – 25 May 2008) / HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait/Iraq (17 May 2005 – 7 May 2006), Afghanistan (16 March 2008 – 6 June 2009), Iraq (14 July 2010 – 14 May 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3; AAM-3; AGCM-4; NDSM; ACM-2CS; ICM-CS; GWTSM; NOPDR-2; ASR; OSR-3; AFRMM, NATO Medal, CMB, CAB, MUC g. Performance Ratings: Seven NCOERs rendered during period of current service under review with evaluation as Among the Best (AB), Fully Capable (FC), or Marginal: 1 May 2008 – 30 April 2009, FC 1 May 2009 – 31 December 2009, FC 1 January 2010 – 31 December 2010, FC 1 January 2011 – 31 December 2011, AB 1 January 2012 – 31 December 2012, AB 1 January 2013 – 31 December 2013, AB 1 January 2014 – 31 December 2014, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: DA Form 1574 (Report of Proceedings by Investigating Officer/Board of Officers) with a summary of the proceedings, and the verbatim findings and recommendations indicating that an administrative separation board that convened and adjourned on 15 March 2015, reported the following findings and recommendations: The board has determined by preponderance of the evidence that [the applicant] did at or near Fort Stewart, Georgia, from 18 to 19 June 2014, committed a serious offense by intentionally using a computer or computer network and email or internet messaging system or other electronic media device to solicit, lure, entice, or attempt to solicit, lure, or entice a child or other person he believed to be a child to engage in any conduct that by its nature was an unlawful sexual offense against a child and did travel to meet said child in an effort to further his actions, and that this offense did warrant separation. That in view of the findings, the board recommended that the applicant be separated from active service with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service. On 7 May 2015, the GCMCA (separation authority) approved the findings and recommendations. Memorandum, dated 1 April 2015, subject: Legal Review – Administrative Separation Proceedings, [the applicant], rendered by the servicing judge advocate, found no legal objection to the administrative separation, and provided the facts and legal analysis of the separation proceedings. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 22 October 2014, psychiatrically cleared the applicant for an administrative separation. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 28 October 2015; DD Form 214; e-mail correspondence, dated from 31 May 2015 to 4 June 2015; undercover statement with e-mail message and copy of photo depicting a female; (page one of four) superior court document, entitled “Final Disposition Misdemeanor Sentence,” dated February 2015; and NCOER for period 1 January 2015 through 28 May 2015. 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. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant’s available record of service, and 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, such that he should have been retained. The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 14 years and two months of service with no other adverse action. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant contends the separation authority made the decision to separate him based on the false belief that he had pleaded guilty to a felony involving sexual misbehavior and with a child. However, Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that a Soldier may be separated when action is taken that is tantamount to a finding of guilty, if a punitive discharge authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts Martial. Furthermore, 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. By regulation, a UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of serious misconduct. It appears the applicant’s generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a general (under honorable conditions) instead of the normal UOTHC discharge. The applicant contends the narrative reason for his separation is inequitable because he was never charged with a felony. However, the narrative reason for his separation is governed by specific directives. The narrative reason specified by AR 635-5-1 for a discharge under Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c is “Misconduct (Serious Offense),” and the separation code is JKQ. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The review of the applicant’s record also revealed that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered the reentry code as 4. The separation authority approved the discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct (serious offense), with a separation code of “JKQ.” The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 20 June 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Further, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board noted an administrative error on the applicant's DD Form 214 and directed the following change according to the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, which shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3, change block 27, reentry code to 3. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: RE-Code 3 e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA 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 AR20150017333 5