1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 7 December 2017 b. Date Received: 11 December 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 pertinent part and in effect, the squad leader targeted the applicant because of making immature remarks, after the applicant caught the squad leader watching pornography in the bunkroom. The squad leader, who was embarrassed, started assigning the applicant extra duty regularly and recommended Article 15 actions multiple times for relatively low level infractions. The applicant was not sure how to contest the Article 15 actions, as the applicant often received and just went along with the punishments. The applicant's case would show a pattern of discrimination by the squad leader. The applicant did not want to be discharged and tried hard to be a good Soldier. The applicant's performance in every other area was superior. 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 21 October 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 August 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 1 April 2005, he received an Article 15 for failing to obey a noncommissioned officer. On 23 May 2005, he received an Article 15 for failing to follow the SOP for guard duty. On 27 July 2005, he received an Article 15 for damaging government property. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 5 October 2005 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 October 2005 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 April 2004 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / HS Graduate / 131 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 1 year, 7 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (9 August 1996 to 13 September 1996) / UNC e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (9 April 2005 to 15 July 2005) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; ICM; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for performance being substandard; failing an APFT; leaving the battalion area in an unauthorized uniform; failing to follow directions on numerous occasions; failing to comply with Ranger standards; not having his ID card while in uniform; being placed in a remedial PT program; lying to an NCO; leaving his NODs unsecured; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; making false official statements on numerous occasions; failing to update his profile; establishing and continuing a pattern of misconduct; being disrespectful towards an NCO; failing to follow guard instructions; and writing his name in the latrine of a military aircraft. CG Article 15, dated 1 April 2005, for disobeying an NCO on 15 March 2005. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $346, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. CG Article 15, dated 23 May 2005, for being derelict in the performance of his tower guard duty on 4 May 2005. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. CG Article 15, dated 27 July 2005, for damaging government property on 18 July 2005. The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $311, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 28 July 2005, indicates the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by his command. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application of the Review of Discharge), dated 7 December 2017; DD Form 214; three Records of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 1 April 2005, 23 May 2005, and 27 July 2005; two counseling statements; and two separate applicant's Article 15 Statements; 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. 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 "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, pattern of misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" 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. The applicant's available record of service, and 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. By the pattern of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. 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 contends that he was harrassed and discriminated by members of his chain of command; however, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. 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 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 AR20180001078 1