1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 August 2018 b. Date Received: 13 August 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 effect, would like an upgrade of discharge for the purpose of obtaining a government job. The applicant made mistakes while in the Army and is trying to be a better person and a better father by supporting the mother of the child and their daughter. The applicant signed up for the Army in hopes of sacrificing life and freedom for the sake of the country. The applicant was denied the chance, because of some bad leadership and the people who sought out the applicant's downfall. The applicant is not trying to pass blame, but is just stating facts. The applicant was treated unfairly in the military and is asking whom this may concern that time be taken to review the case with facts and not with manipulated lies that were told. The applicant asks that it be understood because if the applicant was not good enough to be a good Soldier, does not mean the applicant is a bad person. The applicant also contends commission of serious offense is someone who has gone AWOL, abuse of illegal drugs, or committed a sexual violent offense at a court-martial or stated court which the applicant was not. The Article 15's and infraction counselling's were not as severe as those things. The applicant made mistakes, but is not a criminal nor should be classified as one for the mistakes that were made. 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. The applicant is 20% service-connected for non-BH reasons from the VA. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 10 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 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 8 June 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 May 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for negligently discharging a M4 Carbine in the rear of the battery formation on 19 May 2016; Using provoking or reproachful words towards a noncommissioned officer 1 August 2016 Failing to obey a military protective order on 8 March 2017; and Failing to obey policy memorandum 17 on 24 October 2016 (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 May 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 23 May 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 July 2015 / 3 years, 18 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / HS Graduate / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 1 year, 11 months, 2 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, AAB g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summarized Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 16 June 2016, for through negligence, discharged a M4 Carbine in the back of the battery's formation, such conduct being prejudicial to good order and discipline in the armed forces or being of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces on 19 May 2016. The punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction for 14 days. FG Article 15, dated 1 September 2016, for wrongfully using provoking and or reproachful words, to wit, "I want to kill Staff Sergeant B.M., and then go to behavioral health" or words to that effect, towards Sergeant First Class T.F., on 1 August 2016. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $783 pay per months for two months (suspended), extra duty for 30 days, and restriction for 30 days (suspended). Copy of Policy Memorandum 17 (Command Responsibility for Soldier safety, Security, and Living Standards in the Barracks and the Community), dated 30 October 2015. Summarized Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 28 November 2016, for violating a lawful general order, to wit; paragraph 5 (c) of Senior Commander Policy Memorandum 17, dated 30 October 2015, by wrongfully have a dog in his barracks room on 24 October 2016. The punishment consisted of extra duty for 8 days and an oral reprimand. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 10 April 2017, makes reference to a BH Diagnoses of Unspecified problems related to employment. However, it was noted the applicant had no duty limitations due to behavioral health reasons. He met medical retentions standards and was cleared for administrative action. Several negative counseling statements for acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and Pre-Trial Diversion Order. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant submitted none with his 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 seeks relief contending that he made mistakes while in the Army and he is trying to be a better person and a better father by supporting the mother of his child and their daughter. He signed up for the Army in hopes of sacrificing his life and freedom for the sake of his country. He was denied the chance, because of some bad leadership and the people who seek out his downfall. He is not trying to pass blame, he is just stating facts. He was treated unfairly in the military and is asking whom this may concern that time be taken to review his case with facts and not with manipulated lies that were told. He ask that it be understood that because he was not good enough to be a good Soldier, does not mean he is a bad person. He also contends commission of serious offense is someone who has gone AWOL, abuse of illegal drugs, or committed a sexual violent offense at a court-martial or stated court which he was not. His Article 15's and infraction counselling's were not as severe as those things. He made mistakes, but he is not a criminal nor should be classified as one for the mistakes he has made. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was treated unfairly. In fact, the applicant's three Articles 15 and numerous negative counseling statements justify a pattern of misconduct. The applicant's statement alone does not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. Also as noted in paragraph 7, 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. The evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non- judicial punishment. It appears the applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts; thereby separation action was initiated. 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 applicant seeks relief contending that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of obtaining a government job. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 10 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 AR20180012041 5