1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 June 2017 b. Date Received: 26 June 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, would like an upgrade of discharge for the purpose of being able to reenlist in the military and to get rank back. The applicant contends the discharge packet (which he obtained) has multiple areas where the old unit falsified information. The applicant contends the discharge was for unexcused absences. The applicant has documentation for the absences that were supposed to be excused and that they were never documented. They entered in dates and times that they "supposedly" called which are made up (the applicant obtained the call record and text record to show communication with the leadership). They even entered in dates that they did a home visit, which is definitely not true, because the address on file was only a mailing address (parent's house) and the Soldier that did this "visit" (SGT Andres Deharo) couldn't tell the applicant what area the house was located (the applicant's parent's house). The applicant contends the whole packet was falsified. The unit didn't do any of the procedures in the correct manner and because of their negligence and falsification, the applicant is now discharged from the Army with an undesirable discharge and stripped of rank (E4 to E1). In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 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: Unsatisfactory Participation / AR 135- 178 / Chapter 13 / NIF / NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 28 February 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 9 November 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: having accrued a total of nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled inactive duty training in a one- year; specifically, he was absent without authority on 3 April 2016, 11 September 2016, 15-16 October 2016, and 6 November 2016. The action was suspended for 30 day go give the applicant the opportunity to exercise his rights. He was informed to complete the attached endorsement acknowledging receipt of the action and indicating his election of rights. A copy of the memorandum with the completed endorsement was to be delivered to the address shown on the endorsement within 30 days from the date of his receipt of the memorandum of notification. Any statements or documents he desired to submit in his behalf were to reach the commander within 30 calendar days after he received the memorandum, unless he request and received an extension for good cause shown. Unless an extension was granted, failure to deliver the completed endorsement within 30 calendar days of the date of his receipt of this memorandum would constitute a waiver of his right in. Evidence in the record shows that the certified mail sent to the applicant at (Bonner Drive, Corpus Christi) was delivered and signed for on 14 November 2016. The applicant did not respond and thereby waived his rights to a board. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 13 February 2017 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 December 2011 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 5 years, 2 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: 19 December 2011 to 29 April 2012 / NA 30 April 2012 to 30 August 2012 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Several negative counseling statements for his unexcused absence from Inactive Duty Training (IDT) and Unit Training Assembly (UTA). i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application and documents supporting his claim that documents were falsified in his separation packet. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with his application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve. Chapter 13 provides in pertinent part, that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant. AR 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills accrue during a one-year period and attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in the Soldier's refusal to comply with orders or correspondence; or a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier has failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. Discharge action may be taken when the Soldier cannot be located or is absent in the hands of civil authorities in accordance with the provisions of AR 135-91, paragraph 2-18, and Chapter 3, section IV, of AR 135-178. Army policy states possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a change to his narrative reason for discharge. 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 and diminished the quality of his service by his refusal to participate in unit drills. The evidence of records shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135- 178, Chapter 13, unsatisfactory participation. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. 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. The applicant seeks relief contending his discharge packet has multiple areas where his old unit falsified information. He contends he was discharged for unexcused absences. He has documentation for his absences that were supposed to be excused that they never documented. They entered in dates and times that they "supposedly" called which are made up (he obtained his call record and text record to show he had always kept in touch with his leadership). They even entered in dates that they did a home visit, which is definitely not true, because the address he had on file was only a mailing address (parent's house) and the Soldier that did this "visit"(SGT Andres Deharo) couldn't even tell him what area the house was located (his parent's house). He contends his whole packet was falsified. The unit didn't do any of the procedures in the correct manner and because of their negligence and falsification he is now discharged from the Army with an undesirable discharge and stripped of his rank (E4 to E1). 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 the documents in his separation packet were falsified. The documents submitted by the applicant were noted; however, it is unclear if these documents were submitted prior to the applicant discharge. 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 for an upgrade of the discharge. Further, 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 applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to reenlist in the military and to get his rank back. 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 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 15 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 AR20170009857 2