1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 April 2017 b. Date Received: 21 April 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, has regretted the general discharge from the moment of release from the military. The applicant's parents are proud Air Force veterans and also proud of the applicant's service to the country. On the first occasion, on or about 1 September 2015, the applicant had a couple of beers with some platoon guys, wherein one of the other guys fell and needed to go to the hospital. The applicant received company level punishment for this infraction and on the second offense, was having some beers some friends, when the applicant urinated off a balcony like they had been doing. The applicant ran into a friend's room when a barracks NCO came to see what was happening. The applicant first denied urinating when confronted by the NCO, but then afterwards admitted to doing so. The applicant was given 45 days extra duty while the Article 15 was being processed. About halfway through the extra duty, the unit went to the field. The applicant states upon returning at 0500 hours and after turning in weapons, the applicant went to sleep. At about 0830 hours, the applicant went to do some laundry, as there was no clean uniforms to report for extra duty in. While doing laundry, an NCO from the company came into the laundry room and asked what the applicant was doing. The applicant told the NCO that the applicant was doing laundry because there was no clean uniforms to wear to extra duty. The NCO responded by saying the applicant was making excuses and the applicant responded by using profanity. The NCO stated that the applicant was done and left the area. After completing laundry about 1030 hours, the applicant reported for extra duty without incident and finished out the day. After the discharge, the applicant began pursuing a Commercial Driver's License. Upon receiving the license, the applicant obtained employment with Melton Truck Lines and has been employed for over 90 days without incident. The applicant has sights on the future and would desire an upgrade to reflect the true character the applicant's parents instilled. The applicant understands that underage drinking cannot and will not be tolerated and believes it is fortunate that only the applicant's character had been hurt, which not a true indication of whom one is. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 30 November 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 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 1 August 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 June 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 19 January 2016, he was disrespectful in deportment toward a noncommissioned officer and he disobeyed a noncommissioned officer; On or about 15 January 2016, he was disrespectful in language toward a noncommissioned officer and he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty; On or about 5 December 2015, he disobeyed a noncommissioned officer, was derelict in the performance of his duties, and was disorderly; and, On or about 11 September 2015, he violated a lawful general regulation by wrongfully consuming alcohol under the age of 21. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 13 June 2016, the applicant waived his rights to consult with a JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 14 July 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 March 2015 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / 11B10, Infantryman / 1 year, 4 months, 1 day d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 21 October 2015, for failing to obey a lawful order by consuming alcohol under the age of 21 (16 March 2015). The punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction for 14 day; and, oral reprimand. Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment form, dated 7 December 2015, reflects the applicant was command referred to the ASAP. FG Article 15, dated 23 December 2015, for disobeying a lawful order (5 December 2015); for dereliction in the performance of his duties by wrongfully possessing alcohol under the age of 21 (5 December 2015); and, for disorderly conduct (5 December 2015). The punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $773 pay per month for two months; and, extra duty for 45 days. CG Article 15, dated 29 February 2016, for disrespectful deportment towards a noncommissioned officer (19 January 2016); and, disrespectful language towards a noncommissioned officer (15 January 2016). The punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $365 pay; extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Several Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 17 February 2016, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with an Alcohol abuse, uncomplicated (Axis I). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; and, an Employment Letter. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has obtained his Commercial Driver's License and is employed with Melton Truck Lines. 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. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 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, 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 on Active Duty. 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 Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. 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 30 November 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 AR20170008183 1