1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 31 October 2017 b. Date Received: 4 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 submitted no issues of equity or property to be considered by the board. The applicant in the application contend that lines 11 and 12B did not match; the applicant also asked where were the supporting documents relating to line 13 and 18 (possibly DD Form 214) and where were the reenlistment documents because they were not in the records. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 April 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 October 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 August 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for being arrested on or about 28 June 2012 for four counts of indecent liberties with a child and two counts of statutory rape between on or about 1 July 2011 and 23 June 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 13 August 2012, the applicant voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon his receiving a characterization of service or description of separation no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) (5) Administrative Separation Board: None (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 16 August 2012, the separation authority having reviewed, and approved the conditional waiver of administrative separation board proceedings submitted by the applicant approved the administrative separation and directed that the applicant be discharged from the United States Army with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 September 2006 / 3 years, 24 week (A new enlistment contract covering the period under review was not found in the available record) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / 11 years / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13D1P, Field Artillery Automation / 6 years, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (28 December 2007 to 27 February 2009 and 3 January 2010 to 1 January 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM, NATOMDL, USNAM, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 13 July 2012, indicates the applicant was the subject of investigation for indecent liberties with child and statutory rape or sexual offense of person who was 13, 14, or 15 years old. Memorandum of Record, dated 16 August 2012, from the Staff Judge Advocate, reference Administrative Separation Pursuant to AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Section III of the applicant. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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 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 submitted no issues of equity or property to be considered by the board. However, the applicant in his application contend that lines 11 and 12B did not match; he also asked where were the supporting documents relating to line 13 and 18 (possibly DD Form 214) and where were his reenlistment documents because they were not in his records. However, the applicant's issues relating to his DD Form 214 do not fall within the purview of this Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding these issues. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 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 8 April 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 AR20180001615 1