1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 May 2017 b. Date Received: 10 May 2017 c. Counsel: None 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 repaid the enlistment bonus and the applicant's character has been a high standard. The applicant has grown into a completely different person and would like the discharge to be upgraded to honorable for purpose of getting employment as a Border Patrol Agent, in the event that the packet for re-enlistment become stalled. The applicant's intention is to rejoin the military as the applicant owes the country and team a great debt that the applicant must repay through service to the country. The applicant states, if reenlistment is not the avenue which God has chosen, then the applicant is willing to wait for the next cycle to apply. The applicant would like the opportunity to serve on another forefront of national interest in protecting the borders and any port of entry as the applicant awaits an upgrade, which would clear all credit to the applicant's name. The applicant is sure with the request for some 40,000 more Border Patrol Agents, would certainly be considered. Since discharge, the applicant has not incurred so much as a traffic violation. After struggling to find employment, the applicant finally settled in as a security office in a mall and after just nine months of employment, was promoted to manager through strong work ethic. The applicant does not have secondary schooling and believes this is not the calling as there is no room to grow. The applicant has an expanding family and must pursue other recourses. The applicant must provide for a son who will be born soon and mother, who is the daughter of a retired Colonel. The applicant has confidence the Board will find this in favor and thanks the members for reviewing the case. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 25 September 2019, 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 Participation / AR 135- 178 / Chapter 13 / NIF / NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 April 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: On 24 February 2014, the applicant's commander mailed him the notification via certified mail, with a suspense of 30 days to acknowledge the notice and his rights. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He failed to attend or complete annual training. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant failed to respond to the notification of separation, thereby waiving his right to counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant failed to respond to the notification of separation, thereby waiving his right to an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 23 March 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 17 March 2011 / 8 years (USAR) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92R1P, Parachute Rigger / 3 years, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: IADT, 19 April 2011 - 1 November 2011 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR, g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Affidavit of Service by Mail, dated 26 November 2013, reflects the AT Initiative, dated 20 November 2013, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 26 November 2013. Affidavit of Service by Mail, reflects the notification of separation, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 24 February 2014. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149; DFAS letter; self-authored statement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has not incurred so much as a traffic violation and has obtained employment where he was promoted to manager. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve. Chapter 13 provides in pertinent part, that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant. AR 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills accrue during a one-year period and attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in- the Soldier's refusal to comply with orders or correspondence; or a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier has failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. Discharge action may be taken when the Soldier cannot be located or is absent in the hands of civil authorities in accordance with the provisions of AR 135-91, paragraph 2-18, and Chapter 3, section IV, of AR 135-178. Army policy states possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. 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, 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 and diminished the quality of his service by his refusal to participate in Annual Training. 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. 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 applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. However, 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, if appropriate. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 25 September 2019, 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 AR20170009192 1