1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 February 2018 b. Date Received: 26 February 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of receiving employment opportunities as well as benefits. He contends that he made a bad decision that day and paid for it with fines and his separation from the Army. Prior to this incident his military record was clean. He has learned from his mistakes and has gone on to complete EMT School and was due to graduate from Paramedic School. He has taken the firefighters exam and passed that as well. He recently had an interview with a local Fire Department. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 January 2021, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board granted clemency and determined that the discharge was too harsh, and as a result it was inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (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: 8 December 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 November 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for willfully damaging government property of more than $500.00 by inserting a screwdriver in the ignition. It was noted that he had proven that he cannot follow basic Soldier skills required by the 82d Airborne Division and that rehabilitating him would have only served as a distraction to his unit and its mission. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 November 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 November 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 September 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25U1P, Signal Support Systems Specialist / 1 year, 3 months, 1 month 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: Military Police Report, dated 14 July 2011, which indicates the applicant was the subject of investigation for wrongfully damaging of government property and making a false official statement to law enforcement FG Article 15, dated 19 September 2011, for willfully damaging government property of a value of more than $500.00 by inserting a screwdriver into the ignition to start the tractor. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $733.00 pay per month for two months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 19 October 2011, which indicates the applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and appreciated the difference between right and wrong. There was no evidence of an emotional or mental disorder of psychiatric significance at the time to warrant disposition through medical channels; therefore, the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command including administrative discharge. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; two Military Police Report's dated 14 July 2011; documents from his separation packet; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends that since his discharge he has learned from his mistakes and has gone on to complete EMT School and was due to graduate from Paramedic School. He has taken the firefighters exam and passed that as well. He recently had an interview with a local Fire Department. 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 seeks relief contending that he made a bad decision that day and paid for it with fines and his separation from the Army. Prior to this incident his military record was clean. He has learned from his mistakes and has gone on to complete EMT School and was due to graduate from Paramedic School. He has taken the firefighters exam and passed that as well. He recently had an interview with a local Fire Department. The applicant's contentions were noted. The applicant is to be commended on his post-service accomplishment. However, the service record indicates the applicant committed a discrediting offense, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of receiving employment opportunities as well as benefits. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, 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. 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 29 January 2021, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board granted clemency and determined that the discharge was too harsh, and as a result it was inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20180006208 1