1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 7 July 2016 b. Date Received: 12 July 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests to change the narrative reason for her discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, the reason for her separation should be changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, because the Army made a mistake. She did not realize the significance until she saw an attorney. There were no occurrence of any serious offense. The misconduct cited as bases for her separation were for two counseling statements. One for being 10 minutes late to formation and one, for eating fast food. Neither are serious offense described in paragraph 14-12c. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 2 May 2018, 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 December 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 September 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant established a pattern of serious misconduct by committing multiple Policy Letter, TRADOC Regulation, and Army Regulation violations. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 21 October 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 November 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 February 2015 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / GED / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / None / 9 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Memorandum, dated 13 July 2015, subject: AR 15-6 Investigations Findings and Recommendations of Allegations of Misconduct by [the applicant], and its associated investigative documents, rendered by an investigating officer (IO), who reported his findings that the applicant made offensive sexually oriented remarks toward PVT C, intended to embarrass, intimidate, demean, or degrade him, and that the applicant created an offensive training environment when she made rude and/or offensive sexually oriented commends toward PVT C and PFC A. The IO recommended a letter of admonition issued to the applicant for inappropriate language, that she speak with a SHARP representative to explain sexually oriented remarks are tolerated in the Army, and that she attend anger management sessions. Memorandum, dated 28 July 2015, subject: Formal Sexual Harassment Complaint PVT C, rendered by the brigade SARC-SHARP, upon finding that the investigation appeared thorough and complete and that the allegations of sexual harassment were supported by preponderance of evidence, concurred that the findings were substantiated. The SARC provided further guidance to the applicant's commander for a determination on the disposition. Equal Opportunity Complaint Form, dated 17 June 2016, was rendered by PVT C, who presented the nature of the complaint and requested remedy against the applicant. Negative counseling statements for being disrespectful towards an NCO on numerous occasions; failing to live the Army Values; being recommended for an UCMJ action; failing to be at her appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions; having a sexual harassment allegations being filed against her; being issued a no-contact order; violating policy letter by unauthorized mixed battle buddy team; violating Policy Letter 17 by having an improper relationship with PVT I during IET; consuming takeout food in CQ area; failing to obey an order on numerous occasions; and being recommended for an involuntary separation. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 August 2015, provided no psychiatric diagnosis. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), dated 7 July 2016; memorandum, dated 26 October 2015; extract copy of paragraph 14-12, AR 635-200; four counseling statements, dated 26 May 2015, 25 July 2015, and 10 August 2015; self-authored statement, dated 22 October 2015; two memoranda, dated 22 and 25 September 2015; and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests to change the narrative reason for her discharge. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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. By the incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of her service that ultimately caused her discharge from the Army. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that her service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant requests to change the reason for her separation; however, the narrative reason for her separation is governed by specific directives and as approved by the separation authority. The narrative reason specified by AR 635-5-1 for a discharge under Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is JKQ. 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 contends the discharge was unjust because the Army made a mistake for discharging her under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c for commission of a serious offense, as no serious offense occurred during her service. 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 her issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that she 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 reason for her discharge. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's character and performance. However, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 and reason for the applicant's discharge are commensurate with her overall service record. 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 2 May 2018, 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 Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code 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 AR20160012670 1