1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 8 August 2018 b. Date Received: 13 August 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, he served his country honorable. The applicant wants his children to see how great the country is by giving him a second chance to have a plaque on his wall reflecting he served honorably. Since his discharge, he has been a model citizen and would like to be able to let his kids see that hard work does pay off. The applicant and his wife are planning on purchasing their first home and he would like to have his DD Form 214 hanging in their living room. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 2 December 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 / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 November 2003 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 16 October 2003 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 25 September 2003, he received a Field Grade Article 15 for Failure to Report, disrespecting a noncommissioned officer x 2, and drinking on duty; On 20 August 2003, he received a Vacation of Suspension from the Battery Grade Article 15 on 13 August 2003, for violating a lawful general order; On 13 August 2003, he received a Battery Grade Article 15 for Failure to Report x 2; and, On 26 June 2003, he received a Summarized Article 15 for Failure to Report x 2. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 October 2003 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 October 2003 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 30 December 1998 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 13B10 U6, Cannon Crewmember / 4 years, 10 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 26 June 2006, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (9 and 19 June 2003). The punishment consisted of extra duty for 14 days. CG Article 15, dated 8 August 2003, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (23 July 2003); and, failure to return to duty after GT predictor test (24 June 2003). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3; forfeiture of $356 pay (suspended); and, extra duty for 14 days. Record Of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 20 August 2003, reflects the suspended portion of the punishment imposed on 8 August 2003, was vacated because the applicant violated a lawful general regulation, to wit: USAFACFS Regulation, #210-64, paragraph 9g, dated 26 June 2000. FG Article 15, dated 25 September 2003, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (15 August 2003); disrespectful language toward a noncommissioned officer (13 August and 7 September 2003); and, failure to obey a lawful general regulation by consuming alcoholic beverages during the duty day (13 August 2003). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $575 pay; and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has been a model citizen. 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. 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 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. 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 service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation as Misconduct. The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12b. Soldiers processed for misconduct under this provision will be assigned a Narrative Reason for Separation as Pattern of Misconduct. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization 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 applicant contends that he had good service. 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. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because wants to display his honorable discharge in his new home. However, the issue the applicant submitted is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. 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 2 December 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 / 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 AR20180014708 1