1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 June 2018 b. Date Received: 21 June 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 inequitable, because it was based on an isolated incident involving a physical altercation with a civilian, who repeatedly used abusive language in calling him "a racial slur." The applicant understands that the applicant should have kept composure; however, the applicant was under a tremendous amount of stress during this period due to the father's colon cancer diagnosis, as well as, marital issues. Prior to the incident, the applicant was in good standing and had not received any warnings. The applicant has since applied what was learned from the military to become an Emergency Medical Technician and Firefighter with the Philadelphia Fire Department. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 December 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, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 29 July 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 16 July 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 5 April 2009, the applicant unlawfully strike P.H., a German citizen, in the face with a closed fist. On 5 May 2009, the applicant violated a general regulation, by unlawfully operating an unregistered vehicle. On 14 May 2009, the applicant unlawfully struck C.P., his wife, with a closed fist. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 July 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 July 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 August 2008 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 86 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / None / 11 months, 23 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: MP Report, dated 5 April 2009, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for assault consummated by a battery on 5 April 2009. A Receipt for Inmate or Detained Person, dated 5 April 2009, indicates the applicant was arrested on 5 April 2009, for violating Article 128, assault, and subsequently released from custody. MP Report, dated 15 May 2009, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for assault consummated by a battery. A Receipt for Inmate or Detained Person, dated 15 May 2009, indicates the applicant was arrested on 15 May 2009, for violating Article 128, and subsequently released from custody. FG Article 15, dated 2 June 2009, for unlawfully striking P.H. in the face with a closed fist on 5 April 2009, for unlawfully striking C.A.P. in the fact with a closed fist on 14 May 2009, and violating a lawful general regulation on 5 May 2009, by wrongfully operating an unregistered vehicle. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $699 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 17 July 2009, providing no diagnosis, psychiatrically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None recorded on DD Form 214 / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 20 June 2018. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, that since his discharge, he has applied what he learned from the military to become an Emergency Medical Technician and Firefighter with the Philadelphia Fire Department. 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" 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 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 serious incidents 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 inequitable, because it was based an isolated incident. 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 any 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 evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. Insofar as one isolated incident, although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant contends that he was having family issues, such being under tremendous stress due to his marital issues and his father's health that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, and his post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his accomplishments and complete period of service were or were 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 December 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 AR20180011454 2