IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 June 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140004870 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. Presiding Officer I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case. THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT: 1. The applicant requests to upgrade the characterization of his service from under other than honorable to general, under honorable conditions or honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was based on an isolated incident involving domestic disturbance with his spouse who had retracted her complaint of an alleged assault, whom he never harmed. The applicant’s self-authored statement describes the circumstances and events surrounding his discharge. He was also diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) with a recommendation for an MEB. He continues to suffer from PTSD and requires medical treatment. An upgrade would allow him to receive VA medical treatment. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 18 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 15 March 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HQs and A Co, Co, 369th Sig Bn, Fort Gordon, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 14 November 2009, 6 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 3 months, 29 days h. Total Service: 9 years, 4 months, 0 days i. Time Lost: 3 days j. Previous Discharges: RA (031113-070122) / HD RA (070123-091113) / HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-6 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 25U10, Signal Support Systems Specialist m. GT Score: 97 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: SWA p. Combat Service: Iraq (071128-090108), Afghanistan (061106-070306) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2; AAM-2; AGCM-2; NDSM; ACM-2CS; ICM-CS; GWOTSM; HSM; NPDR-2; ASR; OSR-2; NATO MDL; CAB; VUA r. Administrative Separation Board: Yes s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 November 2003, and reenlisted twice thereafter. The latter reenlistment was on 14 November 2009, for a period of 6 years. He was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 25U10, Signal Support Systems Specialist. He served in Iraq and Afghanistan. He earned two ARCOM’s and two AAM awards. He completed 9 years and 4 months of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record shows that on 12 September 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct for commission of a serious offense, specifically for being involved in a physical and verbal altercation with his wife (120714), and operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated with a BAC of .146 percent and being involved in a traffic accident in which his vehicle hit another vehicle and left the scene of the accident. 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 25 September 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. The applicant did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed action. The battalion commander recommended approval with an under other than honorable conditions discharge and the brigade commander recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 9 January 2013, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. 5. On 25 January 2013, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 6. On 4 March 2013, the separation authority, upon determining that the medical condition outlined in the MEB report was not the direct or substantial contributing cause of the misconduct that led to his separation proceedings, approved the recommendation of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant was reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. 7. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 15 March 2013, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ, and an RE code of 3. 8. The applicant’s record of service indicates three days of time lost for being confined by civil authorities from 14 July 2012, until his return to military authorities on 16 July 2012. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Report of Proceedings by Board of Officers indicates an administrative separation board that convened on 25 January 2013, found that substantial evidence supported the applicant’s involuntary separation under paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for commission of a serious offense and recommended an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. 2. Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings, dated 13 December 2012, indicates the applicant incurred PTSD while on active duty and that he failed retention standards in accordance with AR 40-501, Chapter 3, paragraph 32. The findings and recommendation were approved on 18 January 2013. An Integrated Disability Evaluation System narrative summary, dated 6 December 2012, was also attached. The medical history report indicates a diagnosis of PTSD. 3. Four negative counseling statements, dated between 4 June 2012 and 7 August 2012, for being considered for an involuntary separation; being ordered to have no-contact due to an incident that occurred on 14 July 2012; rescinding of the no-contact order to return to residence; and receiving a special conditions bond upon being released from a county jail. 4. A civilian police bureau incident report, dated 14 July 2012, provides an emergency ambulance services report involving the applicant’s spouse. 5. A civilian police arrest/booking report, dated 14 July 2012, indicates the applicant was the subject of an arrest and investigation for battery with a family violence incident report, and a magistrate court finding of the applicant committing an act of family violence and ordering that he be held without bond until further order. 6. A military police report, dated 20 August 2012, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for operating a vehicle while intoxicated and being involved in a hit and run traffic accident. 7. Three NCOERs rendered during the period under current review: a. An “Annual” report covering the period of 31 October 2011 to 30 October 2012. The applicant was rated as “Fully Capable” and received 3/2 from the senior rater. b. An “Annual” report covering the period of 1 November 2010 to 31 October 2011. The applicant was rated as “Fully Capable” and received 2/1 from the senior rater. c. An “Annual” report covering the period of 1 November 2011 to 31 October 2010. The applicant was rated as “Among the Best” and received 1/1 from the senior rater. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a counsel-authored statement on his behalf; extracted copy of AR 635-200, pages 14 and 15; chronological order of enclosure listing; a self-authored statement for the GCMCA; separation authority’s decision memorandum; an administrative separation board proceedings summarized report; MEB Proceedings, dated 13 December 2012; Integrated Disability Evaluation System narrative summary, dated 6 December 2012; QTC memoranda diagnosing PTSD, dated 9 November 2012; commander’s notification memorandum, undated; affidavit, dated 20 August 2012; congressional correspondence, dated 27 June 2012; counseling statement, dated 27 July 2012; Report of Medical Examination, dated 7 June 2012; Report of Medical History, dated 6 June 2012; Report of Medical Assessment, dated 6 June 2012; and two counseling statements, dated 16 July 2012 and 4 June 2012. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant provided none. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1.  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. 2. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual. 3. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization. 4. 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). 5. 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. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the documents and issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to general, under honorable conditions for the following reasons: a. Length and quality of service: The applicant served nine years and four months, and the preponderance of his service was honorable. b. The record confirms the applicant received several awards, specifically two ARCOMs and two AAMs, and served two tours in combat. c. The applicant’s record reflects documentary evidence of his mental health issues and mitigating factors that PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of his discharge. His health record indicates he had PTSD medical issues while on active duty. 3. This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct. The PTSD evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 4. In view of the foregoing, the characterization of the discharge appearing to be inequitable, it is recommended the Board grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 19 June 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? No Counsel: yes [redacted] Board Vote: Character Change: 1 No Change: 4 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: No Change Characterization to: No Change Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: NA Change RE Code to: NA Grade Restoration to: NA Other: NA Legend: AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record FG - Field Grade IADT – Initial Active Duty Training RE - Reentry AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable SCM- Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial CG - Company Grade Article 15 HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge CID - Criminal investigation Department MP – Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont) AR20140004870 Page 2 of 7 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1