1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 2 November 2017 b. Date Received: 13 November 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, was discharged for the things the applicant did not do. The applicant contends while in the Army, there was a NCO who overstepped authority and was abusive not only to the applicant, but to other Soldiers. The particular incident which cause the discharge involved alcohol and both the applicant and SFC S. who was an immediate supervisor were intoxicated along with approximately 10 other Soldiers. A fight occurred in the Barracks, the applicant was hit in the head and teeth went through the lip, the back of the head hit the concrete and was knocked out in this fight that involved several Soldiers. The NCO who was also involved, and in order to save a career put the applicant in the back of a car and the wife drove both of them off base. The following morning, the applicant woke up laying in bed in the barracks with the Command Sergeant Major and Staff Sergeant waking the applicant up. The SFC blamed the applicant for the fight and subsequently ruined an Army career because of being discharged. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 April 2019, 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: 2 September 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 August 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: being absent without leave for 23 days and consuming alcohol while under age. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 August 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 25 August 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 February 2008 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 21B10, Combat Engineer / 1 year, 5 months, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 18 August 2009, for being absent from his unit from 1 June 2009 until his return on 23 June 2009 and wrongfully violating the Texas alcohol beverage code, by consuming alcohol while under the legal drinking age. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $699 per month for two months, and extra duty and restrictions for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 30 July 2009, which shows the applicant had no evidence of any mental disease or defect, which would warrant a disposition through medical/psychiatric channels. The reported no suicidal or homicidal thoughts at that time. The applicant was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL 22 days (1 June 2009 to 23 June 2009), mode of return unknown j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form149 in lieu of DD Form 293. 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 seeks relief contending that he was discharged for the things he did not do. He contends while he was in the Army there was a NCO who overstepped his authority and was abusive not only to him but to other Soldiers. The particular incident which cause his discharge involved alcohol and both he and SFC S. who was his immediate supervisor were intoxicated along with approximately 10 other Soldiers. A fight occurred in the Barracks, he was hit in the head and his teeth went through his lip, the back of his head hit the concrete and he was knocked out in this fight that involved several Soldiers. His NCO who was also involved, and in order to save his career put him in the back of his car and his wife drove both of them off base. The following morning he woke up laying in his bed in the barracks with the Command Sergeant Major and Staff Sergeant waking him up. His SFC blamed him for the fight and subsequently ruined his Army career because he was discharged. 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 discharged for something he did not do. In fact, the evidence of record shows separation action was initiated against him based on him going AWOL for 23 days and his underage drinking which resulted in him receiving a Field Grade Article 15. 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 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 24 April 2019, 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 AR20170019284 1