1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 31 May 2016 b. Date Received: 9 June 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he would like an upgrade for the purpose of being able to rejoin the military, improve his employment opportunities, and receive medical benefits. He contends his discharge was a result of his lawyers informing JAG that he would be receiving a felony and that in order for him to be prosecuted, he would need to be out of the Army. He had a review board and brought proof of minor infractions; however, the board had already had their minds made up. After two and a half years, there was no felony or proof, so the applicant received a misdemeanor riot charge. The applicant states that he has an opportunity to work with Triple Canopy in Kuwait, but he has to get his discharge fixed first. He always planned on going back into the military, whether it was private contracting or back into the Army. The applicant contends that he had good service, which included a deployment, and was awarded an ARCOM and CIB. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 December 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant’s discharge, the Board found that the applicant’s DD Form 214, block 27 contains the erroneous reentry code of 4. In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27 to read RE-3, as required by Army Regulations. (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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 22 October 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 May 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: destroyed private property (10 December 2012); communicated a threat to Sergeant Y.M. by texting her saying he will put her body in a bag (7 January 2013 and 10 December 2013); failed to report at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on divers occasions (between 18 July 2013 and 22 December 2013); participated in a drive-by shooting at or near Champion’s Sports Bar in Tacoma, Washington (13 October 2013); drove with a suspended license on post (28 November 2013); failed to pay his debts (7 January 2014); and, wrongfully possessed marijuana in Norfolk, VA (25 January 2014). (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 June 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 7 June 2014, the applicant requested consideration of his case by an Administrative Separation Board. On 27 June 2014, the applicant was notified to appear before an Administrative Separation Board and advised of his rights. On 4 August 2014, the Administrative Separation Board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 October 2014 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 11 October 2011 / 3 years and 18 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS Graduate / 88 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (15 November 2012 to 16 June 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 10 December 2013, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for communicating a threat, damage to private property, DNA evidence collection kit, and domestic dispute. A second report, dated 7 January 2014, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for communicating a threat by telephone and DNA collection kit. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 18 March 2014, reflects the applicant was cleared from a behavioral health perspective for administrative separation IAW AR 635-200. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and Superior Court of Washington for Pierce County court documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the applicant. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the 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. It should be noted that the service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code as 4. The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense). Soldiers processed for Misconduct (Serious Offense) will be assigned an SPD Code of JKQ and an RE Code of 3. 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. The applicant contends that his discharge was a result of his lawyers telling JAG that he would be receiving a felony and that in order for him to be prosecuted, he would need to be out of the Army. After two and a half years, there was no felony or proof; therefore, he received a misdemeanor riot charge. The Superior Court of Washington for Pierce County Statement of Defendant on Plea of Guilty (Misdemeanor), dated 4 February 2016, reflects the applicant pled guilty to Attempted Criminal Mischief / Riot – deadly weapon. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that a Soldier may be separated when initially convicted by civil authorities, or 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. Evidence in the records shows the applicant discharge was the result of his destruction of private property, communicating a threat twice, failing to report at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on various occasions, participating in a drive-by shooting at or near Champion’s Sports Bar in Tacoma, Washington, driving with a suspended license on post, failing to pay his debts, and wrongfully possessing marijuana. The applicant also contends he had good service, which included a deployment, and was awarded an ARCOM and CIB. 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 accomplishments. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade for the purpose of being able to rejoin the military, improve his employment opportunities, and receive medical benefits. 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. Further, 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 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentions. b. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 December 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant’s discharge, the Board found that the applicant’s DD Form 214, block 27 contains the erroneous reentry code of 4. In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27 to read RE-3, as required by Army Regulations. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change / 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 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 AR20160010909 5