1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 April 2016 b. Date Received: 14 April 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he was charged for domestic violence after returning from his fourth deployment. However, the case was later dismissed and expunged prior to his separation. The applicant contends that the company commander went out of his way to have him discharged. The applicant further contends that he has many physical and mental health issues, but was separated prior to having a medical evaluation board conducted. After almost 17 years of service, the applicant was assigned a 90 percent disability rating from the VA, with 70 percent for PTSD and 40 percent for TBI. His provider knew he needed to be referred to a medical board but it did not occur due to the political climate. He served with honor and distinction. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant did not have mitigating medical or behavioral health conditions for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. The applicant was separated for misconduct (serious offense) with honorable character of service for service from 19970711 thru 20140403 with no time lost. Issues including assaulting spouse and false official statement. A limited review through the JLV (Joint Legacy Viewer) of the applicant's Veterans Administration records notes 92 problems with 13 VA entered including PTSD, obstructive sleep apnea, unspecified glaucoma, intervertebral disc disease lumbar with radiculopathy and others. The Veteran's Administration has service-connected the applicant at 90% overall (70% PTSD and 40% TBI). The applicant met medical retention standards IAW (in accordance with) Chapter 3, Army Regulation (AR) 40-501, and following the provisions set forth in AR 635-40 that were applicable to the applicant's era of service. The applicant's medical conditions were duly considered during medical separation processing. A review of the available documentation found no evidence of a medical disability or condition which would support a change to the character or reason for the discharge in this case. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 February 2017, 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 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 3 April 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 14 May 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: grabbed his spouse by the neck and threw her to the ground (4 May 2012); and, made a false official statement to COL B, CSM D, LTC L, CSM T, MAJ F, and 1SG W, about the facts and circumstances surrounding the assault of his wife (8 January 2013) (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 16 May 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 18 July 2013, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 5 September 2013, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant's discharge with characterization of service of honorable. On 7 October 2013, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of honorable. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 7 October 2013 / Honorable 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 October 2009 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-7 / 38B4P, W4 Civil Affairs Specialist and 11B3P, Infantryman / 17 years, 11 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 9 April 1996 to 10 July 1997 / NA RA, 11 July 1997 to 6 October 1999 / HD RA, 8 October 1999 to 6 March 2001 / HD RA, 7 March 2001 to 2 December 2003 / HD RA, 3 December 2003 to 28 June 2005 / HD RA, 29 June 2005 to 28 February 2007 / HD RA, 1 March 2007 to 25 October 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Afghanistan (12 January 2003 to 10 September 2003), Iraq (13 January 2004 to 16 April 2004 and 8 August 2006 to 25 October 2007), Philippines (1 March 2010 to 5 August 2010 and 24 March 2011 to 4 December 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: PH, ARCOM-3, AAM-3, AGCM-4, NDSM, ACM-2CS, ICM- 2CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM-2, KDSM, HSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR, CIB g. Performance Ratings: Five NCOERs rendered during period under current review: 23 January 2008 thru 21 January 2010, Among the Best 22 January 2010 thru 23 October 2010, Among the Best 24 October 2010 thru 23 October 2011, Among the Best 24 October 2011 thru 23 October 2012, Fully Capable 24 October 2012 thru 23 October 2013, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 18 April 2013, shows the applicant was reprimanded for assaulting his wife, being arrested by civil authorities, and making false official statements (packet with its associated documents). Report of Proceedings by Board of Officers, dated 5 September 2013, reports the findings and recommendation of the administrative separation board. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Memorandum, dated 19 June 2013, Subject: Administrative Separation Board Referral, Chapter 14-12c, Commission of a Serious Offense, rendered by the Acting Staff Judge Advocate, noted for medical/mental considerations as "TBI; Treated for PTSD in 2006; Adjustment disorder." VA letter, dated 6 April 2016, reflects the applicant was assigned a service-connected disability of 90 percent, and within the summary, he received 70 percent for PTSD and 40 percent for TBI. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; VA letter, dated 6 April 2016; State Petition and Order of Expunction, dated 16 March 2015; and pages 54 to 61 medical records. 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. 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. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members' discharges. "Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre- existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service." "Conditions documented in the record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which PTSD or PTSD related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Correction Boards will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant's record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record further 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. 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 that the charges against him were dismissed and expunged before he left the Army. However, this action is a procedural step which is part of a normal process, when an alternative forum is chosen. In this case, it appears the dismissal and expungement resulted per compliance with deferred prosecution. The applicant contends he has many physical and behavioral health issues that were not carefully considered. A careful review of the available record and the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues along with notable service- connected post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation. The applicant contends he was discharged prior to a medical evaluation board being conducted; however, Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. The applicant contends he served with honor and distinction. 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 a change to the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant requests a change to the reason for his separation; however, the narrative reason for his separation is governed by specific directives. The narrative reason specified by AR 635- 5-1 for a discharge under Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is JKQ. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional documents: MFR, 15-6 Investigating Officer - 1 page MFR, Team Leader, dtd 15 February 2017 - 1 page Letter of Reference, Primary Instructor, dtd 20 February 2017 - 1 page Letter of Reference, Empoyer, dtd 21 February 2017 - 1 page b. The applicant presented no additional contention(s). c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): Ms. Christina Myers - Spouse (O) 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 27 February 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 11. 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 SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20160007195 1