1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 11 January 2017 b. Date Received: 17 January 2017 c. Counsel: None 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 effect, both his unit and battalion commanders recommended him for an honorable discharge. He was never under any disciplinary review. He was a good Soldier. He was promoted to being the battalion duty driver. He had informed his commander that he did not want to remain in the military. His security clearance was revoked, which caused for either reclassifying or be discharged from the Army. His commanders liked him and respected his wishes by helping him. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 18 April 2018, 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: Unsatisfactory Performance / AR 635- 200, Chapter 13 / JHJ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 28 May 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 May 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed that in an AR 15-6 investigation, dated 24 January 2013, the following allegations against him were substantiated: He uttered disloyal statements about the US Army. He was a disgruntled Soldier who wanted out of the Army, and made statement to that effect. Because of his statements, he would lose him security clearance, which would require him to reclass to another MOS. In his one year and six months in the Army, it would require his second MOS reclassification. His continued presented in the US Army would be to the detriment of discipline, good order, and morale and would serve as a disruptive influence in future duty assignments. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 2 May 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 April 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 July 2011 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 31E10, Internment/Resettlement Specialist / 1 year, 10 months, 3 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Cuba / Guantanamo Bay (1 May 2012 to 25 May 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for displaying an unprofessional conduct; making statements of disloyalty; stating non-allegiance to the US Army; failing to obey an order or regulation; being noncompliant with procedural rules; and abandoning his post at his assigned position. Report of Proceedings by an Investigating Officer (IO), dated 22 January 2013, reported the findings of sufficient supports the allegations that the applicant uttered disloyal statements about the US Army, insufficient evidence supports the allegations that he made statements or attempts to acquire Secret material through illicit means, the applicant was a disgruntled Soldier who made statements of wanting to be out of the Army, he no longer had any loyalty to the US Army or the US, he genuinely did not know the severity of his statements, and that he had taken an interest in learning about computer hackers but at the time, he had no interest to hack a government computer. The IO recommended continued extra duty and counseling on the repercussions of an "Other Than Honorable Discharge" and the possibility of changing MOS to one that he has chosen and not forced into. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 20 February 2013, provided no diagnosis by the behavioral health provider. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 11 January 2017, and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13-2e states in pertinent part, that separation proceedings will be initiated for Soldiers without medical limitations that have two consecutive failures of the Army Physical Fitness Test. The reason for discharge will be shown as physical standards. The service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance for failure to meet physical standards will be characterized as honorable or general, under honorable conditions. 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 "JFT" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 13-2e as Physical Standards. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JFT" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. It also identifies the SPD code of "JHJ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, Unsatisfactory Performance. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JHJ" 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 record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's service 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. By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable characterization of service. 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 both his unit and battalion commanders have recommended him for an honorable discharge; however, during the notification process, his unit commander informed him that the separation authority was not bound by his recommendation as to the characterization of his service, and that the separation authority may direct that his service be characterized as honorable, or general (under honorable conditions). Further, the applicant had a record of unfavorable entries in his service record, such as the investigation into the allegations that were made bases for his discharge, and the negative counseling statements. The discrediting entries as bases for his discharge constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army, and such adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 18 April 2018, 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 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 AR20170004173 1