1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 24 November 2015 b. Date Received: 30 November 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for his separation. The applicant states, in pertinent part and in effect, he was led to believe he was being discharged for a medical reason, shin splints. Changing the narrative reason for his discharge to any reason that does not show misconduct would help with him to reenlist. He believes his current discharge is based on failing three APFTs. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 February 2017, 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 10 July 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 June 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was counseled on numerous occasions for his pattern of misconduct and has been punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for his misconduct. His acts of misconduct ranged from disobeying an NCO on two occasions, being derelict in the performance of his duties on numerous occasions, and failing to be at his appointed place of duty on multiple occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 19 June 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 June 2008 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 November 2006 / 3 years, 15 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / HS Graduate / 93 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 19K10, M1, Armor Crewman / 4 years, 8 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USN, 14 June 2000 to 6 November 2001 / GD IRR, 18 March 2005 to 17 October 2005 / NA ARNG, 18 October 2005 to 7 November 2006 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: NIF / NIF f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, NMCOSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for failing to obey orders or regulations on numerous occasions; being insubordinate towards an NCO; being in improper uniform on numerous occasions; disobeying an NCO; lying to an NCO; failing to bring in and lay out his initial issued items; lying to a commissioned officer; failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; not complying with plans of actions; missing items for the field exercise; leaving weapon unattended; missing dental appointment; not informing his chain of command for having a second job; and failing to improve duty performance. CG Article 15, dated 21 April 2008, for disobeying his NCO on two separate occasions (3 April 2008). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $352, 14 days of extra duty, and 14 days of restriction (suspended). i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: 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. 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. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides 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. It identifies the SPD code of "JKA" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12b, Pattern of Misconduct. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKA" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for his separation. The applicant's record of service and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record further 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 applicant contends the discharge was unjust because he was led to believe he was being discharged for a medical reason, shin splints. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request to change the narrative for his discharge. The applicant requests to change the reason for his separation; however, the narrative reason for his separation is governed by specific directives. The narrative reason specified by AR 635- 5-1 for a discharge under Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b is "Pattern of Misconduct," and the separation code is JKA. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. 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 3 February 2017, 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 SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20150019108 1