1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 October 2018 b. Date Received: 9 October 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, serviced 12 years of honorable service with no blemishes on the record outside of the results that the separation board decided upon. The applicant contends through 12 years, the applicant received outstanding marks across the board, to include receiving no worse than a 2/2 on all of NCOER's, performed above and beyond during four combat deployments, was top of the class at both NCOES' attended and never received any Article 15's or any non-judical punishment. The indecency that led to separation was not drug related, did not endanger lives and was not malicious in any manner. The applicant simply went to the grocery store closest to a new residence to get some groceries for the kids that were coming over for the weekend. The applicant was given an order by the company commander to not go within 250 feet of the ex-wife and that is exactly with the applicant did. At no point during the verbal or written order did the command inform the applicant of any businesses or premises that the applicant could not go to regardless if the ex-wife was there or not. This order was given almost six months prior to this incident. At no point during those six months did the commander make any attempt to update the applicant of her whereabouts or where she was working or any information that would help the applicant avoid coming in contact with her. Due to her being an Australian citizen, the applicant had no clue if she was even still in the United States due to the applicant following the no contact order. He contends that he always believed Solider should be unformatted at all times and updated as needed to ensure any order is able to be followed. This commander failed to do that and cost the applicant a career due to vagueness and inability to ensure the Soldier was properly informed. Nothing the applicant did should had warranted being kicked out of the Army, let alone with a discharge as low as the applicant received. The applicant enjoyed the time in the Army and would give anything to serve the country once more. Since the applicant has been out of the Army, the applicant has adjusted to civilian life, but the discharge will have long lasting effects on the future and children's future. It prevented the applicant from reaching 20 years of military service and being able to retire. Since the discharge, the applicant has not gotten into any trouble and continues to be an upstanding citizen while hoping for a chance to continue to serve the country. The applicant wants to thank the board for their time in reviewing this request and hopes they take the time to look at the record and recognize this discharge does truly represent 12 years of honorable service. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 September 2019, 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-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 5 December 201733 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 June 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for violating a Military Protective Order on 12 May 2017 and 17 May 2017; and Communicating with indecent language on multiple occasions to multiple women not his wife. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. The applicant was referred to a separation board. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 25 September 2017, the board with the applicant and his counsel present determined by preponderance of the evidence that the applicant at or near Fort Stewart, GA did violated a military protective order on 12 May 2017 and 17 May 2017. In view of the findings, the board recommended that the applicant be separated from active service. In view of the board's recommendation to separate the applicant from active service, the board recommended that the applicant be discharged from military service with the issuance of General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 November 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 November 2014 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 33 / Associate Degree / 124 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 11B30, Infantryman / 12 years, 6 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 10 May 2005 to 7 January 2009 / HD RA, 8 January 2009 to 1 October 2012 / HD RA, 2 October 2012 to 20 November 2014 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Iraq (19 November 2005 to 20 November 2006 and 21 September 2008 to 15 September 2009) Afghanistan (26 February 2013 to 25 November 2013), and DJIBOUTI (3 February 2016 to 7 October 2016) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-5, AAM-4, VUA, AGCM-3, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ICM-CS-4, NOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-3, NATOMDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: 10 March 2014 to 27 March 2015, Fully Capable 28 March 2015 to 26 October 2015, Fully Capable 27 October 2015 to 26 October 2016, Met Standard h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Proceedings by Board of Officers, dated 25 September 2017. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 July 2017, which indicates the applicant completed command directed MSE as command was pursuing Chapter 14-12B due to the applicant violating an MPO and having an inappropriate relationship. He understood that he was being separated from the Army due to violating an MPO and having an inappropriate relationship. He denied having plans or intentions of harming himself or others and was thus deemed to be low risk of self-harm. The applicant was thus cleared from Embedded Behavioral Health for any administrative action deemed appropriated by the United States Army. Negative counseling statement for violation of military protection order. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; enlisted record brief (ERB); three letters of support; two Service School Academic Evaluation Reports (DA Form 1059's); and several NCO Evaluation Report's DA Form 2166-8. 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 seeks relief contending that he serviced 12 years of honorable service with no blemishes on his record outside of the results that the separation board decided upon. The applicant contends through his 12 years he received outstanding marks across the board, to include receiving no worse than a 2/2 on all of his NCOER's, performed above and beyond during four combat deployments, was top of his class at both NCOES 1 attended and never received any Article 15's or any non-judical punishment. The indecent that led to his separation was not drug related, did not endanger lives and was not malicious in any manner. He simply went to the grocery store closest to his new residence to get some groceries for his kids that were coming over for the weekend. He was given an order b his company commander to not go within 250 feet of his ex-wife and that is exactly with he did. At no point during the verbal or written order did his command inform him of any businesses or premises that he could not go to regardless if his ex-wife was there or not. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishments. However, the applicant's incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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. It should be noted that the service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry code as 4. The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of misconduct (serious offense). Soldiers processed for misconduct (serious offense) will be assigned an SPD Code of JKQ and an RE Code of 3. In view of the foregoing and notwithstanding the propriety of the discharge, it appears that block 27, reentry code should be changed to 3, as approved by the separation authority. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 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 13 September 2019, 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 AR20180014354 1