1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 12 January 2018 b. Date Received: 16 January 2018 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 pertinent part and in effect, the discharge was actually based on APFT scores and alcoholism. More so than other issues brought out at the separation hearing. Since discharge, the applicant continued alcoholism treatment, diagnosed as moderate alcoholism. The applicant attended a three-day ASAP course that was offered. If the applicant received treatment for alcoholism, the applicant would have been a better highly productive Soldier, but the applicant received none. The request for an upgrade is based on good performance as a military policeman and to obtain closure. 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 diagnoses of a head injury. VA records only contain DoD content. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 March 2020, 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: 18 December 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 November 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Between 1 February 2008 and 7 May 2008, the applicant committed sodomy. On 6 April 2008, the applicant was disrespectful in deportment to an NCO. On divers occasions, between 10 June 2008 and 13 June 2008, the applicant was derelict in the performance of his duties by willfully entering a private office that he had no authority to enter. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 November 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 25 November 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 July 2006 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 111 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 31B10, Military Police / 3 years, 5 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTSM; KDSM; ASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Counseling statements for disregarding AR 670-1; being asleep while on duty; duty performance being substandard; disrespecting an NCO in deportment; failing to obey an order or regulation; adding diagnostic two-mile run due to failing an APFT; failing height and weight standards; being enrolled in the special population PT program; and being barred from reenlistment. CG Article 15, dated 13 May 2008, for committing sodomy with Ms. K.V., between 1 February 2008 and 7 May 2008. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $352 (suspended), and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) Scorecard showing results of four record APFTs conducted on 20 February 2008, 17 October 2008, 13 May 2009, and 20 August 2009. CG Article 15, dated 14 October 2009, for being derelict in the performance of his duties between 1 September 2009, and 18 September 2009. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $327, and 14 days of extra duty and restriction. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 12 January 2018; counseling statement, dated 20 March 2008; and certificate of achievement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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 14-12b 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. 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 pattern of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. 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 contends the discharge was unjust because it was based on not being able to pass a physical fitness test and alcoholism issues. 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 for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant contends he was only offered a three-day ASAP course, but no treatment for his alcoholism. However, AR 635-200, paragraph 1-16d(2), entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states the rehabilitative requirements may be waived by the separation authority in circumstances where common sense and sound judgment indicate that such transfer will serve no useful purpose or produce a quality Soldier. Further, AR 600-85, paragraph 3-8 entitled self-referrals, states the applicant could have self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) counseling center for assistance. Insofar as the applicant's contentions that he received no treatment for his alcoholism issues, the evidence of record shows the command attempted to assist the applicant in performing and conducting himself to Army standards by providing counseling and by the imposition of non- judicial punishment, and for the APFT failures, he was provided diagnostic tests and enrollment in the special populations PT program. The applicant failed to respond appropriately to these efforts. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. 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 4 March 2020, 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 AR20180003318 1