1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 24 July 2018 b. Date Received: 3 August 2018 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, was a young man, stressed from combat and made some mistakes. The applicant was not thinking clearly at that the time, had the applicant been, the applicant would not be submitting this application. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 22 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 5 June 2013 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 May 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; he violated a general regulation, U.S. Army Alaska (USARAK) CG Policy #0-21, by wrongfully using the intoxicant "Spice" between (22 January 2013 and 22 February 2013). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 13 May 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: Applicant demanded consideration of his case by an administrative separation board; although he was not entitled to a board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 21 May 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 3 April 2009 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / HS Graduate / 104 b. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 5 years, 10 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 2 July 2007 to 2 April 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska / SWA / Iraq, 15 June 2008 to 21 May 2009 / Afghanistan, 17 April 2011 to 17 April 2012 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-3, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-2CS, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-3, NATO MDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 11 April 2011, revealed the applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI. The PTSD screen was negative and the mTBI screen was positive. He was screened again at the TBI clinic and tested negative. Summary Court-Martial, dated 25 April 2013; the applicant was found guilty violating a lawful general regulation, U.S. Army Alaska (USARAK) CG Policy #0-21, dated 1 November 2012, by wrongfully using the intoxicant "Spice" between (22 January 2013 and 22 February 2013). He was sentenced to reduction to PVT / E-1, forfeiture of two-thirds of one month pay; to be confined for 30 days. FG Article 15, dated 16 January 2013, for being derelict in the performance of those duties in that you negligently stored blank ammunition in your barracks room(17 November 2012); reduction to PFC / E-3, forfeiture of $990 pay for two months (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 30 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Military Confinement for days 25 days, 25 April 2013 to 20 May 2013 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): 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, he was a young man, stressed from combat and made some mistakes. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from stress through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Community Counseling Center and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. The applicant further contends, he was not thinking clearly at that the time, had he been he would not be submitting this application. The rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what he believes was an unfair discharge is not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature. 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 22 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 AR20180011459 1