1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 12 August 2016 b. Date Received: 12 September 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 and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he served his initial contract honorably. He was forced to do a one-year extension to enable him to go to Special Forces selection. However, several months later, he was in an argument with an NCO, for the way the NCO was treating people. A room inspection was then conducted and his privately owned weapon was found, which became basis for his unit to either discharge him or prefer court-martial charges. At the time, he took the general discharge because it appeared to be the easiest path. He has since served with the Minnesota and Florida Army National Guard without problems. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 November 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: 31 October 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 October 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: being disrespectful and disobedience towards an NCO; disobeying orders; communicating a threat to a NCO; and possessing an unregistered weapon. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 5 October 2005 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 October 2005 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 November 2004 / 2 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 119 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 5 years, 10 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG (20 December 1999 to 20 June 2001) / NA IADT (21 June 2001 to 10 September 2001) / HD ARNG (11 September 2001 to 20 March 2002) / HD RA (21 March 2002 to 8 November 2004) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM; AGCM; NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for disrespecting an NCO; disobeying an order; and disrespecting an NCO. CG Article 15, dated 20 June 2005, for disobeying an NCO on 13 May 2005, and disobeying an NCO on 13 May 2005. This punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 (suspended), and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. MP Report, dated 19 July 2005, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for failing to obey a general order-weapons; and communicating a threat. FG Article 15, dated 30 August 2005, for failing to obey a lawful general regulation on 19 July 2005, communication a threat to an NCO on 19 July 2005, and being disrespectful in language and deportment towards an NCO on 19 July 2005. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $692 per month for two months (suspended), and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application, dated 12 August 2016; DD Form 214; ARNG Orders, dated 20 April 2011; Enlistment Document, dated 8 August 2013; and self- authored statement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant's documentary evidence shows his continued service with the Army National Guard, since 4 September 2007. 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 an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record 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. By the incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. 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 sufficient 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 sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. In consideration of the applicant's post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. 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 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 of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his 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 1 November 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 new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160014964 1