1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 October 2018 b. Date Received: 4 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, would like an upgrade of discharge for the purpose of being able to start schooling as a nurse. The applicant was young and made mistakes, but has learned from it. The applicant was discharged a month before the ETS purposely so the applicant wouldn't receive benefits. The applicant had more leave days saved than time was left on the contract and a sergeant who didn't like the applicant purposely put the applicant out right before the ETS. The applicant now just wants to move forward and better oneself. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 July 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, and 28, contain erroneous entries. The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, c. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Civil Conviction) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKB / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 11 February 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 October 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for underage drinking on 4 October 2013 Underage drinking, disrespect, and assaulting a noncommissioned officer on 22 November 2013; Violating USFK Policy Letter #6, by purchasing too many products containing DMX on 28 November 2013; and Assaulting another Soldier with a closed fist on 22 June 2014. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 14 October 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 31 October 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 March 2012 / 3 years, 23 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 102 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 14S10, Avenger Crewmember / 2 years, 10 months, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-2 g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 31 December 2013, which shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for failure to obey General Order Policy Letter #6. CG Article 15, dated 24 April 2014, for failure to obey a lawful general order, to wit: USFK Policy Letter #6, Prohibited Substances, dated 17 October 2011, by purchasing 40 units of a product containing the drug Dextromethorphan between 5 September 2013 and 28 November 2013, violating a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 8-2, USFK Regulation 27-5, Individual Conduct and Appearance, dated 7 July 2011, by wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the age of 21 on 4 October 2013, 22 November 2013, and 19 December 2013, being disrespectful in language toward a noncommissioned officer on 22 November 2013, and assaulting a noncommissioned officer grabbing the uniform with both hands on his chest on 22 November 2013. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $400 pay (suspended) and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Military Police Report, dated 14 July 2014, which shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for assault consummated by a battery. FG Article 15, dated 11 September 2014, for unlawfully striking PFC K.W.M., in the face with a closed fist on 22 June 2014. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $765 pay per month for two months (suspended), extra duty and restriction for 45 days, and oral reprimand. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 August 2014, which shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for Alcohol Abuse, in early remission. It was noted that the applicant was responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative or judicial proceedings. 'The applicant was cleared from a psychological standpoint, therefore he was cleared for any administrative actions his command deemed necessary. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 and DD Form 293. 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. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 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 he was young and made mistakes but he has learned from it. He was discharged a month before his ETS purposely so he wouldn't receive benefits. He had more leave days saved than time was left on his contract and a sergeant who didn't like him purposely put him out right before his ETS. He now just wants to move forward and better himself. The applicant's contends were noted; however, The applicant's numerous 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. The applicant seeks relief contending that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to start schooling as a nurse. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. Also, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 25, separation authority as AR 635-200, Chapter 14, SEC II; block 26, separation code as JKB; and block 28, narrative reason for separation as Misconduct (Civil Conviction). The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, and paragraph 14-12c commission of a serious offense. Therefore it appears that the applicant's DD Form 214 should be correct to show the following changes; block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c; block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, and block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). 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 24 July 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, 26, and 28, contain erroneous entries. The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, b. block 26, separation code changed to JKQ, c. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Misconduct (Serious Offense). 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Serious Offense) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12C e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKQ / 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 AR20180014747 1