1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 November 2016 b. Date Received: 19 December 2016 c. Counsel: None d. Previous Records Review: 8 July 2016, AR20150008519 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, it has been five years since his discharge. He had no violations with law enforcement. He is currently a corrections officer for a State; however, he would like to work in law enforcement as a police officer. He has remarried with three children. He is currently enrolled in college and working towards a bachelor's degree in criminal justice. He has documentary evidence showing he has shown good judgment and great behavior. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 November 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: 14 January 2011 c. Separation Facts: (NIF, but according to the applicant's documentary evidence) (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 1 September 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: Between 1 April 2009 and 6 August 2010, the applicant displayed a pattern of discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the UCMJ, Army regulations, the civil law, and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 September 2010 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 18 September 2010 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 October 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 4 years, 6 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR (25 January 2006 to 30 May 2007) / HD RA (31 May 2007 to 30 September 2008) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (5 September 2007 to 30 December 2007), additional combat service NIF f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AGCM; NDSM; ICM-2CS; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (NIF, but according to the applicant's documentary evidence) Negative counseling statements for failing to provide spousal support on numerous occasions; lying to an NCO on numerous occasions; disrespecting an NCO; failing to obey a lawful order; having a pattern of misconduct; admitting to adulterous conduct; and conceiving a child with someone other than his spouse. FG Article 15, dated 18 August 2010, for violating an Army regulation by failing to provide spousal support on 30 June 2010 and 31 July 2010, making a false official statements on 8 August 2010, 6 August 2010, and 17 June 2009, and wrongfully having sexual intercourse with a woman not his wife between 1 April 2009 and 1 May 2009. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $723 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty. Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 28 August 2010, provided no diagnosis. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 15 November 2016; seven character reference statements; USAR discharge orders; reenlistment document; university transcript; correctional officer training notification; four identification cards; five training course certificates; correctional officer oath certificate; and separation file. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, he is currently employed as a State corrections officer and enrolled in college. 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 14-12b 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. 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" 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. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. Although the applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge, the applicant's documentary evidence confirms that the his 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 incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. In consideration of the applicant's post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow him to obtain employment as a police officer. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Based on the available 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 testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents. b. The applicant presented the following additional issues: Change narrative reason. Change Reentry Eligibility (RE) code to 1 c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 November 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 11. 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 d. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. 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 AR20160019440 3