1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 November 2017 b. Date Received: 6 November 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, would like an upgrade of discharge for the purpose of being able to attend school to become a doctor. The applicant was unjustly discharged. The applicant made a decision that was unbecoming of a Soldier. Such as not being on time in formation and having two military identification cards at one time. Once the consequences from these choices were given, the applicant fulfilled them. The applicant realized the severity of these actions, regrouped and refocused one's attention on being the best Soldier that the applicant could be which meant operating in integrity as the applicant was reared to do. The applicant was moved to another section and upon arrival, the first sergeant informed the applicant that Chapter 13 action was started, however, the First Sergeant decided to give the applicant another chance to prove to the command group that the applicant deserved to stay in the Army. The applicant became focused and driven to stay out of trouble and move forward in a career as a Soldier. Over the course of the next two years, the applicant stayed out of trouble and continued to excel in the job. The applicant regained the rank of E-1 to E-4(P) and was put in charge as a Team Leader with several other Soldiers under the applicant's watch. However, during the final year of enlistment, the unit received a new Regimental Commander and part of the Commander's new approach to discipline within the Battalion, any Soldier that had a Chapter 13 started, would be discharge immediately regardless of the extenuating circumstances surrounding any particular case such as the status at the time. The applicant received several letters of recommendations from the Command Group during the time in the Training Room. The Regimental Commander decided to continue the applicant's Chapter 13 action. 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 no BH diagnoses while on active duty. The applicant is 30% service-connected for Major Depressive Disorder from the VA. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 January 2020, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 10 March 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 October 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for violating a lawful general regulation on 25 October 2011; Having falsified the ASVAB scores on his Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) on 11 July 2012; and Failing to report on divers' occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 October 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 3 December 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 April 2010 / 4 years, 21 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 92 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 3 years, 8 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 16 November 2010, for failure to go at the time prescribe to his appointed place of duty 23 October 2010, 28 October 2010, and 1 November 2010. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $378 (suspended), and extra duty and restriction of 14 days. Summarized Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 18 May 2011, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 16 May 2011. The punishment consisted of 7 days extra duty and 14 days restriction (suspended for 30 days). FG Article 15, dated 12 December 2011, for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully possessing more than one Armed Forces of the United States Geneva Conventions Identification Card and damaging one on 25 October 2011. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $865 pay ($665 suspended), extra duty for 45 days (30 days suspended), and restriction for 15 days. CG Article 15, dated 4 January 2013, for with intend to deceiving, signed an official record, to wit: his enlisted record brief, which record was false in that his ASVAB scores did not reflect his achieved Armed Forces Classification Test result on 11 July 2012. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-3, forfeiture of $435 pay per month for one month, and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Military Police Deck Blotter, showing the applicant was the subject of investigation for a defective rear break light along with other prior incidents. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 24 May 2013, which shows the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and appreciated the difference between right and wrong. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 in lieu of DD Form 293; letters of recommendation at the time of discharge; personnel action recommending promotion to E-4; and separation packet. 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 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 applicant seeks relief contending he made a decision that was unbecoming of a Soldier, such as not being on time in formation and having two military identification cards at one time. Once his consequences from these choices were given, he fulfilled them. He realized the severity of his actions, he regrouped and refocused his attention on being the best Soldier that he could be which meant operating in integrity as he knew he was reared to do. He was moved to another section, upon his arrival, his first sergeant informed him that Chapter 13 action was started, however, he decided to give him another chance to prove to him and the command group that he deserved to stay in the Army. He became focused and driven to stay out of trouble and move forward in his career as a Soldier. Over the course of the next two years, he stayed out of trouble and continued to excel in his job. He regained his rank E-1 to E-4(P) and was put in charge as a Team Leader with several other Soldiers under his watch. However, during his final year of enlistment, his unit received a new Regimental Commander and part of his new approach to discipline within the Battalion, any Soldier that had a Chapter 13 started, would be discharge immediately regardless of the extenuating circumstances surrounding any particular case such as his status at the time. He received several letters of recommendations from his Command Group during his time in the Training Room. The Regimental Commander decided to continue his Chapter 13 action. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non-judicial punishment. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to attend school to become a doctor. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 January 2020, 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 AR20170018791 1