1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 November 2017 b. Date Received: 9 November 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, the discharge was inequitable because it based on an isolated incident during 17 years of service with no other adverse action. The applicant was discharged because of an unfair hearing. The applicant alleges that Soldiers admitted lying on their sworn statements and they were pressured to make negative statements about the applicant. 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 Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with Adjustment Disorder. In summary, the applicant did not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 June 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, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 10 March 2016 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 April 2015 and 29 June 15 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he wrongfully violated a lawful general regulation to wit: Army Regulation 600-20, paragraphs 3-5 dated 20 September 2012, by wrongfully sending inappropriate text messages to SSG A.C., PV2 F.H., SPC S.C., and SGT J.D.C., on diverse occasions between (1 October 2013 and 4 June 2014); and he wrongfully violated a lawful general regulation to wit: Army Regulation 600-20, paragraph 7 dated 20 September 2012, by wrongfully asking for pictures of PV2 F.H., in exchange for a promotion (28 May 2014); and he made a false official statement (26 June 2014). (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 22 September 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: Applicant requested to have his case heard by an administrative separation board. On 18 November 2015, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 8 December 2015, the administrative separation board convened. The applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant be discharged with issuance of a character of service of general (under honorable conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 27 January 2016, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 December 2010 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 30 years / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: 74D48, Chemical Operations Specialist / 17 years, 1 month, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 3 February 1999 to 28 February 2001 / HD RA, 1 March 2001 to 28 March 2004 / HD RA, 29 March 2004 to 17 December 2008 / HD RA, 18 December 2008 to 15 December 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / SWA / Iraq, 9 January 2005 to 27 December 2005 and / Afghanistan, 7 September 2012 to 214 May 2013 f. Awards and Decorations: MSM, ARCOM-4, AAM-3, AGCM-5, ACM-CS, ICM-CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NOPDR-3, OSR, NATO MDL-2, ASU g. Performance Ratings: 31 July 2010 to 10 May 2013, Among The Best 11 May 2013 to 10 May 2014, Fully Capable 11 May 2014 to 11 August 2014, Marginal 16 August 2014 to 15 August 2015, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 11 September 2014, for he violated a lawful regulation, by wrongfully sending an inappropriate text message of a sexual nature, to wit: "You thick as 2 biscuts (sic)", or words to that effect, to SSG A.C., a subordinate subject to his orders (16 December 2013); violated a lawful regulation, by wrongfully sending inappropriate text messages of a sexual nature to wit: "Be honest if I was single would you let me find your fav positions," and "I want to hit it," or words to that effect, to PV2 .F.H., a subordinate subject to his orders (14 May 2014); violated a lawful regulation, by wrongfully requesting pictures in return for a promotion via text message, to wit: "You owe me miss lady," and "" ... What you owe me?" and "Idk ... a pic?" or words to that effect, from PV2 F.H., a subordinate subject to his orders (28 May 2014); violated a lawful regulation, by wrongfully sending inappropriate text messages of a sexual nature, to wit: "It was good seeing you, I still think that you are fine," and "I still wanted to find out how soft your lips are," and "be if you let me I will do it," or words to that effect, to SPC S.C., a subordinate subject to his orders (4 June 2014); violated a lawful regulation, by wrongfully sending an inappropriate Facebook message of a sexual nature, to wit: "Duty is boring I want to cuddle," or words to that effect, to SPC S.C., a subordinate subject to his orders (27 October 2013); violated a lawful regulation, by wrongfully sending an inappropriate Facebook message of a sexual nature, to wit: "Cute pies, I think your sexy," or words to that effect to, SPC S.C., a subordinate subject to his orders (1 October 2013); violated a lawful regulation, by wrongfully sending inappropriate Facebook messages of a sexual nature, to wit: "You still fine though," and "I always thought you were fine, you dissed me" or words to that effect, to SGT C., a subordinate subject to his orders (1 February 2014); and with intent to deceive, make an official statement, which statement was totally false, and was then known by him to be so false (24 June 2014); forfeiture of $2,042 pay for two months and extra duty for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 30 October 2014, relates the applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI in accordance with OTSG/MEDCOM policy Memo 10-040; the results were negative. No behavioral health services needed as indicated by service member. Soldier met medical retention per AR 40-501 and was therefore cleared for administrative separation actions under chapter 14-12 or any other administrative actions deemed necessary by command. The applicant received two negative counseling statement for having an active no contact order and substandard performance, serious offense and pending separation action. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); and a DD Form 214. 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 document 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 inequitable because it based on an isolated incident during 17 years of service with no other adverse action. However, the service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant further contends, he was discharged because of an unfair hearing. There is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of 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 unjustly discharged. The applicant also contends, that Soldiers admitted lying on their sworn statements and they were pressured to make negative statements about him. 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 unjustly discharged. 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 3 June 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 AR20170018301 1