1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 11 June 2015 b. Date Received: 15 June 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he got the general, under honorable conditions discharge because he left ETOH class two days early. The class was under the US Navy at the time (SARP) in Norfolk VA. It was a hardship penalty for a volunteer program. Under Army Regulations at the time it was up to the company commander to determine what would happen. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 August 2016, 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, block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code, contains an erroneous entry of 3. In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code to read “4,” as approved by the separation authority. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200 / Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 26 August 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 31 August 1999 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 21 years / HS Graduate / 114 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: SPC / E-4 / 31P10, Microwave Systems Operator/Maintainer / 4 years, 11 months and 26 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Korea f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AGCM, GWTSM, NDSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, dated 11 June 2015. 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 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for alcohol or drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. Army policy states an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service. However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant’s available record of service, and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant’s record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he got the general, under honorable conditions discharge because he left ETOH class two days early. The class was under the US Navy at the time (SARP) in Norfolk VA. It was a hardship penalty for a volunteer program. Under Army Regulations at the time it was up to the company commander to determine what would happen. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record. Based on the available record, the discharge appears consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. The service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code as 3. The DD Form 214 confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure. Soldiers processed for alcohol rehabilitation failure will be assigned an SPD code of JPD with an RE code of 4. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 August 2016, 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, block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code, contains an erroneous entry of 3. In view of the error, the Board directed an administrative correction to block 27, reentry eligibility (RE) code to read “4,” as approved by the separation authority. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change to SPD / Change RE code to 4. e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable 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 OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150010225 1