1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 29 May 2017 b. Date Received: 21 June 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the applicant feels as though the discharge should be changed because the applicant served honorably even though the applicant had a couple hick-ups, but never had an Article 15's or negative counseling. The applicant's goods have always outweighed the negativity. The applicant has had multiple people taking up for the applicant's character as a Soldier and lower enlisted trusting in the applicant more than they did for their NCO because they knew that the applicant would stick up for them or point them in the right direction of someone who could help them; the applicant took care of every Soldier equally. The applicant can admit when one messes up and is human enough to admit when one is wrong. The applicant fell in love with another Soldier while still in the separation period with the kid's mother. They were separated for a whole 2 years before the applicant finally tracked her down to serve her with the divorce paperwork but life doesn't stop because she's trying to avoid the inevitable. The applicant now hopes the board takes this into consideration. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Partner Relational Problem and Other Specified Family Circumstances. The applicant is 90% service-connected; 70% for PTSD from the VA. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnosis is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 October 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 27 February 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 September 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for making a false official statement to 1LT J.N.W. on 28 June 2016. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 6 October 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 November 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) However, it should be noted; Memorandum for Commander, dated 24 January 2017, indicates that on 29 November 2016, the separation authority suspended the administrative separation pertaining to the applicant. The administrative separation was suspended for a period of 12 (twelve) months. The suspension was conditional on the applicant continued honorable service to the United States Army. It was noted in the time since the act was suspended, the applicant had repeatedly violated the Military Protective Order against PFC J.B., and conducted himself in a manner that was prejudicial to the good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces when he falsely identified himself as PFC B's First Sergeant to her civilian landlord. This gave him ground and reason to vacate the suspension. In light of the applicant's continued misconduct, the separation authority elected to vacate the applicant's suspension and ordered his release form the United States Army with a characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions), effective the date of this memorandum (24 January 2017). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 July 2015 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91F10, Small Arms / Artillery Repairer / 4 years, 6 months, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 6 August 2012 to 21 July 2015 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (7 August 2014 to 30 November 2014) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL, ACM-CS, g. Performance Ratings: NIF h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Protective Orders, dated 10 March 2016, 26 April 2016, and 29 July 2016. AR 15-6 Investigation, related to the applicant engaging in an adulterous relationship with PFC J.B. Based on the investigating officers findings the applicant and PFC J.B., had been involved in a close, intimated relationship since September 2015, which was in violation of Article 134- Adultery, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Base on the interview with CPT J., and the photograph she proved to him, he found that the applicant and PFC B., had also violated Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice, by failing to adhere to the Military Protective Order issued to them by their chain of command. Two recommendations were made; i.e., that both individuals receive Article 15's for violating Article 92 and Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and that both be transferred to different organizations in the 82nd Combat aviation Brigade or the 82nd Airborne Division. Letter of Reprimand, dated 29 July 2016, for having inappropriate living conditions with another married Soldier within his unit and failing to obey the Military Protective Order that had been issue to him earlier. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 September 2016, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible, could distinguish right from wrong and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate as a respondent in any administrative proceedings. The applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. Commander's report, dated 1 November 2016, indicates that on 29 February 2016 the applicant violated a Military Protective Order issued to him on 23 February by CPT S.G., by wrongfully having contact with PFC J.B.; on 24 May 2016, the applicant violated a Military Protective Order issued to him on 26 April 2016 by CPT A.J., by wrongfully having contact with PFC J.B.; and between 1 September 2015 and 29 February 2016 he wrongfully engaged in an inappropriate relationship with PFC J.B., with resulted in the applicant receiving a company level letter of reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application. 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (serious offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" 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 and a change to his narrative reason for discharge. 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. 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 evidence of record shows the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The appropriate RE code is 3. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant seeks relief contending that he feels as though his discharge should be changed because I feels as though he did serve honorably even though he has had a couple hick-ups but never had an Article 15's or negative counseling. He contends his goods have always outweighed the negativity. He has had multiple people taking up for his character as a Soldier and lower enlisted trusting in him more than they did for their NCO because they knew that he would stick up for them or point them in the right direction of someone who could help them, he believes he took care of every Soldier equally. He can admit he mess up and he is human enough to admit when he is wrong. He fell in love with another Soldier while still in the separation period with his kid's mother. They were separated for a whole 2 years before he finally tracked her down to serve her with the divorce paperwork but his life doesn't stop because she's trying to avoid the inevitable. The applicant's contentions were noted and he is to be commended on his service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. However, the incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. Also, it should be noted, the separation authority suspended the administrative separation against the applicant 29 November 2016. The administrative separation was suspended for a period of 12 (twelve) months. The suspension was conditional on the applicant continued honorable service to the United States Army. It was noted in the time of the suspension, the applicant had repeatedly violated the Military Protective Order against PFC J.B., and conducted himself in a manner that was prejudicial to the good order and discipline in the armed forces and of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces when he falsely identified himself as PFC B's First Sergeant to her civilian landlord. 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 24 October 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 AR20170009557 1