1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 2 March 2017 b. Date Received: 6 March 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was improper because he was denied medical treatment for his injury and had to leave to seek treatment elsewhere. He went AWOL and got an examination that he paid for out of pocket. He returned home and received a medical evaluation from the VA, he receives medical disability for his service connected injury. His misconduct was a single incident and he had never been reprimanded for anything during his enlistment. If he had received proper medical treatment, he would not have left and would have completed his enlistment and received an honorable discharge. The way he was treated was inequitable and should have been handled differently. He served honorably and should have been discharged honorably. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant did not have a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 June 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 30 January 2013 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 January 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; without authority, absented himself from his unit (21 August 2012 until 17 September 2012). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 January 2013, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 January 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 April 2010 / 3 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 28 years / GED Certificate / 118 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 2 years, 9 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 30 May 2011 to 4 December 2011 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15 dated, 21 November 2012, for being AWOL, 21 August 2012 until 17 September 2012; reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of $745 pay for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. This Article 15 is not contained in the available record, see unit commander's recommendation memorandum. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL for 27 days, 21 August 2012 until 17 September 2012; mode of return unknown. However, this period of AWOL is not annotated on the applicant's DD Form 214 block 29, dates of time lost during this period. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); Radiological Associates document; and a letter, VA summary of benefits (two pages). 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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. By the misconduct (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 seeks relief contending, his discharge was improper because he was denied medical treatment for his injury and had to leave to seek treatment elsewhere. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was denied medical treatment for his injury or that the discharge was improper. The applicant further contends, he went AWOL and got an examination that he paid for out of pocket. The Radiological Associates document submitted by the applicant is acknowledged. The applicant also contends, he returned home and received a medical evaluation from the VA, and he receives medical disability for his service connected injury. The VA document is acknowledged that granted the applicant a 10 percent combined service-connected evaluation. The applicant additionally contends, his misconduct was a single incident and he had never been reprimanded for anything during his enlistment. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization of service. Furthermore, the applicant contends, if he had received proper medical treatment, he would not have left and would have completed his enlistment and received an honorable discharge. The rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what he believes was an unfair discharge is not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature. Moreover, the applicant contends, the way he was treated was inequitable and should have been handled differently. 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. Lastly, the applicant contends, he served honorably and should have been discharged honorably. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier's separation specifically allows such characterization. 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 13 June 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 AR20170004516 1