1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 June 2018 b. Date Received: 2 July 2018 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 applicant's ability to serve was impaired by youth and immaturity, including personal problems with losing a gunner. Since discharge, the applicant has been a good citizen. 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 diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, Major Depression, and PTSD. The applicant is 70% service- connected for PTSD from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with mTBI and Insomnia. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is partially mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 18 December 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI), and post-service accomplishments. Therefore, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 January 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 November 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant wrongfully use marijuana, a control substance between on 15 August 2006 and 15 September 2006. The applicant was derelict in the performance of his duties by sleeping on duty on 30 June 2007. The applicant was disrespectful to a noncommissioned officer on 08 June 2006 and 09 June 2007. The applicant violated a lawful command by not having a ground guide and without wearing a Kevlar on 26 June 2007. The applicant violated a lawful general regulation, to wit: AR 670-1, by not shaving and missing a belt in ACU's on 26 June 2007. The applicant failed to obey a posted speed limit on 06 March 2006. The applicant failed to go at the time prescribed to his appoint place of duty on 22 December 2006, 01 November 2007, 05 November 2007, and 08 November 2008. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 November 2007 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: In an undated memorandum / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 3 October 2005 / 3 years, 20 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 84 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 19D10, Cavalry Scout / 2 years, 3 months, 2 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Iraq (18 November 2006 to 4 October 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; NDSM; ICM; GWOTSM; ASR; OSRB-2 g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for continually trying to do his own things; disrespecting NCOs on numerous occasions; sleeping on missions; having poor job performance; improperly operating a motor vehicle within the post speed limits; actions being of safety concerns; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; failing to wear the prescribed uniform; failing to use a ground guide; and violating AR 670-1 (missing ACU belt and not shaving). Summarized Article 15, dated 14 June 2007, for being disrespectful in deportment towards an NCO on 8 June 2007. The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction. CG Article 15, dated 15 November 2007, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 1 November 2007, (continuation sheet NIF). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 (suspended); forfeiture of $380; and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 27 November 2007, indicates the applicant was mentally responsible for his behavior, able to distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative or judicial proceedings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 26 June 2018; two character reference/supporting statements; character reference contact list; two birth certificates; Police Department criminal record report, dated 14 June 2018; and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's employment as a site maintenance worker for the Girl Scouts service center in Massachusetts. 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 serious incidents 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 impaired by his youth and immaturity at the time of the discharge. 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 applicant contends that since leaving the Army he has been a good citizen. The applicant's post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with the application. However, in review of the applicant's entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re- characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. 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 18 December 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of PTSD and TBI), and post-service accomplishments. Therefore, 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 AR20180011514 1