1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 April 2017 b. Date Received: 21 April 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that an upgrade of discharge would help for employment purposes. The applicant contends the discharge in 2015 was for actions in 2013, in which the punishment was fulfilled. In 2013, the applicant went through discharge procedures and was retained. The applicant was falsely accused and dismissed on charges which led to discharge proceedings. The accuser did not show for the proceedings and the MP's claimed they had no evidence to suspect the accused actions. In 2015 there was push to draw down forces and the First Sergeant, who had a grudge against the applicant, found a way to get rid of the applicant. The applicant contends a trial by court martial was not allowed. The applicant will be graduating with a Master's degree in Business Administrative, but the discharge has made it very difficult to land an internship, let alone a normal job because of the DD Form 214 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant believes in the heart of hearts, the applicant was not perfect, but with God as a witness, the applicant served the country honorably. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 10 August 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 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 19 February 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 12 August 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for having held down Ms. X., against her will and inserting his fingers into her vagina, without her consent. After she struggled free, he bit her finger and shoved her to the ground on 24 January 2014; and At or near Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, he reported for duty with a blood alcohol content equal to or greater than .05 grams per 100 milliliters of blood on 16 May 2013. It was also noted that the following misconduct may be considered for separation, but not for characterization of discharge if separation was warranted under provisions of paragraphs 1-15 and 3- 5 of AR 600-235 (635-200) At or near Wheeler Army Airfield, Hawaii, the applicant was drunk and disorderly on 14 February 2011; and While intoxicated in public at or near Fayetteville, North Carolina, he asked a police officer if he was "fucking stupid," referred to him as a "faggot," and became so unruly after arrest that he was placed in solitary confinement. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 18 August 2014, the applicant voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service or description of separation no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions). The applicant also requested personal appearance before an administrative separation board. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF; however, documents submitted by the applicant show the applicant along with legal counsel appeared before the board. The board determined that the allegations in the Notice of Administrative Separation IAW AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 14-12c, Commission of a Serious Offense, were supported by a preponderance of the evidence. Based upon evidence presented, the board found that the allegation that the applicant did hold down Ms. X., against her will and inserted his fingers into her vagina, without her consent. After she struggled free, he bit her finger and shoved her to the ground, on or about 24 January 2014 was not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. Based upon evidence presented, the board found that the allegations that the applicant did report for duty with a blood alcohol content equal to or greater than .05 grams per 100 milliliters of blood, on or about 16 May 2013 was supported by a preponderance of the evidence. Based upon the findings the board recommended that the applicant be involuntarily separated with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 February 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 October 2012 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 28 / 14 years / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 88M1P, Motor Transport Operator / 8 years, 27 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 23 January 2007 to 23 February 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Iraq (17 August 2007 to 31 October 2007 and 1 December 2008 to 17 November 2009) and Afghanistan (15 October 2011 to 6 October 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2, AAM, MUC-2, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ACM-2CS, ICM-2CS, ASR, OSR-3, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 21 June 2012 to 30 May 2013, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 17 May 2013, reference the applicant being drunk on duty unable to perform his duties. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; board proceedings from discharge packet; and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with his 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 seeks relief contending he was discharged in 2015 for actions from 2013, in which he fulfilled his punishment. In 2013 he went through discharge procedures and was retained. He was falsely accused and dismissed on charges which lead to his discharge proceedings. His accuser did not show for the proceedings and the MP's claimed they had no evidence to suspect him in the accused actions. In 2015 there was push to draw down forces and his first sergeant, who had a grudge against him as a demoted sergeant found a way to get rid of him. The applicant contends he was not allowed a trial by court martial. He now will be graduating with his Master's degree in Business Administrative, but his discharge has made it very difficult to land a internship let's alone a normal job because of his DD Form 214 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He believes in his heart, he was not perfect, but with God as his witness, he served the country honorably. 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 his discharge was the result of a grudge against him or the result of a draw down in forces. 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 applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of obtaining employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 10 August 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 AR20170008186 4