1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 June 2016 b. Date Received: 8 July 2016 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 signed his Article 15 with the understanding discharge proceedings would be initiated with the recommended characterization of service being honorable. However, a change of command occurred and the new commander determined the applicant would receive a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant contends that he was deceived and due to the change of leadership and the strenuous timeline as a result of the change, he was not given the chance to rectify the situation. Therefore, he would like his discharge upgraded. In a record review hearing conducted at San Antonio, TX on 24 March 2017, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. company commander recommendation for honorable discharge), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 December 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 22 July 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant violated a lawful general regulation by wrongfully having relationships with Soldiers of a different rank that created an adverse impact on discipline. It was also noted in the commander's report that the applicant was in possession of an unregistered firearm. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 July 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 September 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 September 2009 / 5 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 13F1P, Fire Support Specialist / 5 years, 3 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (19 May 2011 to 21 December 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, NCOPDR, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NIF h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 24 April 2014, for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully entering onto Boundary Line Lake during hours of darkness and wrongfully having a relationship with Soldiers of a different rank that created an actual adverse impact on discipline (14 March 2014). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-4, forfeiture of $1,164 pay, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; and DD Form 214. 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 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 contends his discharge should be upgraded because he signed his Article 15 with the understanding discharge proceedings would be initiated with the recommended characterization of service being honorable. However, a change of command occurred and the new commander determined the applicant would receive a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant contends that he was deceived and due to the change of leadership and the strenuous timeline as a result of the change, he was not given the chance to rectify the situation. The applicant's contentions were noted; 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 this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was given the proper discharge that was intended or that he was told he would receive an honorable discharge. Furthermore, as noted in the unit commander's report, the applicant was discharged as a result of having wrongful relationships with Soldiers of a different rank that created an adverse impact on discipline and he was in the possession of an unregistered firearm. The applicant's statements alone does not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. 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 record review hearing conducted at San Antonio, TX on 24 March 2017, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. company commander recommendation for honorable discharge), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 AR20160012625 1