1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 November 2017 b. Date Received: 22 November 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests to change the narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, received a GO Article 15 punishment of a written reprimand, and no other punishment was authorized. The DD Form 214 stating the narrative reason for discharge was "unacceptable conduct," is incorrect, because an Article 15 separation is not an authorized punishment. The narrative reason for discharge should read, "'ETS,'" since in block 18 indicates, "'Member has completed first full term of service/nothing follows," and since only a board of inquiry can make a finding for separation for misconduct. The board of inquiry did not find misconduct. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate no BH diagnoses while on active duty. The applicant is 70% service-connected for PTSD from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety, PTSD, and Depressed Mood. In summary, although the applicant had a BH diagnosis, it does not mitigate the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 22 May 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: Unacceptable Conduct / AR 600-8-24, Paragraphs 4-2b / JNC / NA / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 1 June 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 July 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed to show cause for retention on active duty pursuant to AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b, due to his misconduct based on: A US Army Criminal Investigation Command investigation revealed that the applicant repetitively made unwelcome advances, kisses, and inappropriate touching upon a fellow female classmate after she repeatedly asked him to stop. On 23 May 2016, he received a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) for his misconduct. The GOMOR was filed in his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) on 11 July 2016. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) DA Ad Hoc Review Board Recommendation: Honorable (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 May 2017 / Honorable 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 10 December 2015 / OCS Appointment (OBV until 10 December 2018) b. Age at Appointment / Education / GT Score: 23 / Bachelor of Science Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-1 / 42B, Human Resources Officer / 2 years, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (19 May 2015 to 9 December 2015) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CID Report, dated 29 April 2016, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for abused sexual conduct (Adult). General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand and its associated documents, dated 23 May 2016, indicates the applicant was reprimanded for unprofessional and inappropriate behavior towards his fellow classmates. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 December 2016, provided no diagnosis, but indicated that the applicant was cleared by behavioral health for officer administrative separation. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Forms 293 and 149 (Applications for the Review of Discharge, and Correction of Military Record), dated 20 November 2017; DD Form 214; Commander's Report of Disciplinary or Administrative Action, dated 7 April 2017; and CID Report, dated 29 April 2016. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges), sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security. Paragraph 1-22a, provides that an officer will normally receive an honorable characterization of service when the quality of the officer's service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty. An honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. A general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service will normally be issued to an officer when the officer's military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A separation general (under honorable conditions) will normally be appropriate when an officer submits an unqualified resignation or a request for relief from active duty under circumstances involving misconduct which renders the officer unsuitable for further service, unless an under other than honorable conditions separation is appropriate. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service under conditions other than honorable. An officer will normally receive an under other than honorable conditions when they resign for the good of the service, are dropped from the rolls of the Army, are involuntarily separated due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or for the final revocation of a security clearance as a result of an act or acts of misconduct. 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 "JNC" as the appropriate code to assign Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b, unacceptable conduct, pursuant to resignation or voluntary discharge in lieu of elimination proceedings. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests 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 the applicant's discharge, based on unacceptable conduct, 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 Army officers. It brought discredit on the Army and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant provided no corroborating evidence demonstrating that the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence showing his service mitigated the unacceptable conduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust, because he was found guilty in a non-judicial proceeding of violating Article 120, UCMJ, and the command determined that the punishment would be an official GOMOR, and nothing in his record indicated that additional punishment was authorized; therefore, the narrative reason for his separation as unacceptable conduct is incorrect, and that misconduct was not found by the Board of Inquiry. Additionally, the narrative reason for his discharge should read, "'ETS,'" since in block 18 indicates, "'Member has completed first full term of service/nothing follows." 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 was 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 to change the narrative reason for his discharge. Further, his assertion that block 18 of DD Form 214 reads he completed the "first full term of service"; to that effect, DD Forms 214 are prepared according to AR 635-8 (Separation Processing and Documents) with specific instructions of what is entered into block 18. Moreover, his assertion that the narrative reason for his discharge, "Unacceptable Conduct" is incorrect, AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-1a stipulates that an officer is permitted to serve in the Army because of the special trust and confidence the President and the nation have placed in the officer's patriotism, valor, fidelity, and competence. An officer is expected to display responsibility commensurate to this special trust and confidence and to act with the highest integrity at all times. However, an officer who will not or cannot maintain those standards will be separated. Paragraph 4-2b, further provides for reasons for his separation, which is "Unacceptable Conduct." Therefore, the rationales the applicant provided as the bases for what he believes was an unfair discharge are not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature. Insofar as his request to change the reason for his separation, the narrative reason for his 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 4, paragraph 4-12b is "Unacceptable Conduct," and the separation code is JNC. 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 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 22 May 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 AR20180000170 1