ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  4 November 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170011866


APPLICANT REQUESTS RECONSIDERATION:  reconsideration of request to change 
the narrative reason for separation and the separation program designator (SPD) code 
on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to 
“completion of required active service” or equivalent, with the pertinent separation code.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	A self-authored letter
*	Military Police Captain Career Course (MPCCC) Individual Student Assessment 
Plan (ISAP)

FACTS:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the 
previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of 
Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20150008298, dated 30 March 2016.

2.  The applicant provided new evidence and arguments not previously considered by 
the Board that warrants consideration at this time.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, 

   a.	Nowhere within the 76 pages of IASP is "retest" explained.  In this regards, the 
retesting of an Operation Order Exam and subsequent failure resulted in his dismissal 
from the course and eventual discharge from the Army.
   
   b.	He did not ask for a review, nor was a review given.  He was never informed that 
a "retest" entailed taking an entirely "different" exam, and one that he believes was 
substantially more difficult than the initial one.  On the morning of the retest exam, there 
were two exams, not the one exam, posted for retest on the SharePoint.  He asked the 
instructor which exam was to be administered after looking at the two titles, neither of 
which was the title of the first Operation Order Exam administered.  The instructor did 
not know; therefore, he had to call downstairs to find out.  When he came over to inform 
him which of the two exams he was to take, he was told the exam was the one that 
appeared to be the more difficult of the two.

   c.	Throughout his time in the Army, he was always a very hard worker and 
dedicated Soldier going well above and beyond what was requested of him.  His 
evaluation reports were always very good and he never had any negative counseling or 
paperwork during his time in service.

4.  The applicant provides a copy of the ISAP, which provides the student with the 
overall requirements and procedures for successful completion of the MPCCC.  In 
addition, the purpose of the ISAP is to inform MPCCC students of policies and 
procedures regarding student assessment and graduation requirements.  It also 
describes key actions and responsibilities to ensure application of consistent standards 
for all students.   

5.  A review of the applicant’s service record shows:

   a.	He took the oath of office on 7 September 2004 as a Reserve Commissioned 
Officer.
   
   b.	DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 14 August 
2013, reflects the applicant failed to achieve course standards for the MPCCC 03-13.  
Further noting, based on the applicant’s three failures, a Student Status Review (SSR) 
Board made the decision to recycle the applicant into the MPCCC 04-13. 
   
   c.	DA Form 1059, dated 12 December 2013, reflects the applicant failed to achieve 
course standards for the MPCCC 04-13.  He failed to achieve a passing grade of 70 
percent on the Company Operation Order (OPORD) examination and retest, in addition 
to being relieved as the class leader due to failure of class accountability.  He was 
removed from the course following a SSR.
   
   d.	On 10 April 2015, he was released from active duty (REFRAD) and transferred to 
the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement). His DD Form 214 shows:

*	item 11 (Primary Specialty) – “38A CIVIL AFFAIRS 6 YRS 3 MOS”
*	item 12c (Net Active Service This Period) – “0006 03 26”
*	item 18 (Remarks) – in pertinent part, “REFRAD PURSUANT TO 
UNQUALIFIED RESIGNATION“
*	item 23 (Type of Separation) – “RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY”
*	item 24 (Character of Service) – “HONORABLE”
*	item 26 (Separation Code) – “JHK”
*	item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – “SUBSTANDARD 
PERFORMANCE”

6.  Orders C-03-503823, issued by HRC, dated 13 March 2015, shows he was 
transferred to the Retired Reserve, effective 11 April 2015.

7. The applicant provides a copy of the MPCCC ISAP, wherein it states, in pertinent 
parts:

a.	“Course Requirements: Graduation status is determined by a student’s ability to
complete all course requirements…An inability to complete any one of these events will 
result in a SSR with recommendation for disposition…for decision as applicable.  

b.	Retest of Graded Assignments:  Students who do not achieve a passing score on 
a graded test, assignment, or event will be counseled in writing by their SGL.  The 
counseling will include the study reference list with the name of the instructor who will 
outline the supplemental training and the date of retest will be administered.  Although a 
student must achieve a passing score on a subsequent attempt, the grade or 
assignment achieved on the first attempt will determine the grade or assessment 
awarded towards the overall academic position…A test covering the entire contents of 
the instruction will be administered to the student that fails to achieve a minimum 
passing standard on a graded assignment.  

c.	Adverse Action: An MPCCC student may have adverse action taken against 
him or herself for academic deficiency.  A SSR will be processed for any student 
identified by their SGL as academically deficient which could result in recycle or 
dismissal.  A student will be identified as academically deficient if a student fails an 
examination and the retest for that examination.

d.	SSR Procedures:  An SSR will be initiated by the course manager when a 
student fails to meet course standards or requirements.  An SSR is initiated by a written 
counseling of the student.   However, a counseling statement alone or one 
accompanied by a letter of concern does not constitute an SSR. 

e.	Reasons for Dismissal.  Students may be considered for recycle into a later 
course or dismissal from a course for academic deficiency demonstrated by failure to 
meet course standards or lack of academic progress that makes it unlikely that the 
student can successfully meet the standards established for graduation.   

f.	If an SSR is initiated with a recommendation to dismiss the student from the
course, the student will be provided with copies of all documents pertaining to the 
proposed action and notified in writing of the following actions:

*	proposed action
*	basis for the action
*	consequences of dismissal
*	availability of legal advice
*	date, time, and place of the board proceeding
*	right to appear before the board and present evidence, including witnesses
*	right to appeal the decision
*	right to submit matters for consideration

8.  The applicant does not provide any documentation to show he requested a board 
and appealed the board’s decision for dismissal.

9.  In ABCMR in Docket Number AR20150008298, dated 30 March 2016, he requested 
a correction to his narrative reason for separation and to his SPD code to show he was 
entitled to 180 days of medical coverage.  His request was denied by the Board.  The 
Board based their decision on the facts of case, and noted he failed to achieve the 
course standards for MPCCC on two separate occasions.  Here was no evidence 
indicating inequity in justice for the narrative reason and SPD code.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-24 establishes the policy for processing involuntary release 
from active duty and termination of Reserve appointments of student officers and 
warrant officers attending branch orientation, familiarization courses, or warrant officer 
basic course.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provided 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.  A SPD code of "JHK" applies to officers who were 
involuntarily discharged for substandard performance of duty under the provisions of 
Army Regulation 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2a (2).

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found the relief 
was not warranted.  The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered.  The 
applicant was released from active duty due to substandard performance due to failing 
to pass the MPCCC on two separate occasions.  The Board noted he had the 
opportunity to present extenuating or mitigating circumstances at his disciplinary 
hearing regarding to his test; however, he failed to do so.  Therefore, the Board stated 
that his narrative reason for separation and the corresponding SPD were not in error or 
unjust.  



BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

X	X	X	DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or 
injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient 
as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.


	  
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the 
Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

REFERENCES:

1.  Army Regulation 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges) established the policy 
for processing involuntary release from active duty and termination of Reserve 
appointments of student officers and warrant officers attending branch orientation, 
familiarization courses, or warrant officer basic course.  Paragraph 4a, states, in part, 
that an officer will be discharged for substandard performance of duty if:

*	A downward trend in overall performance resulting in an unacceptable record of 
efficiency, or a consistent record of mediocre service
*	Failure to keep pace or to progress with contemporaries, as demonstrated by a 
low record of efficiency when compared with other officers of the same grade and 
competitive category
*	Failure to exercise necessary leadership or command expected of an officer of 
their grade
*	Failure of an officer to absorb technical proficiency required for grade and 
competitive category
*	Failure to properly perform assignments commensurate with an officer's grade 
and experience
*	Apathy, defective attitudes, or other characteristic disorders to include inability or 
unwillingness to expend effort.

2.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provided 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.

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20170011866

5

1