1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 October 2015 b. Date Received: 26 October 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the president of the board disregarded regulation on three occasions: (1) notification that the government JAG would have two people present was not filed by the deadline, prior to the deadline it was stated there would be no testimony; (2) the president allowed admittance of documents that were not provided to his counsel prior to the board meeting as required; and (3) the president of the board allowed members to question the applicant in direct violation of his choice to not answer questions. The statements provided by the government's witnesses were complete hearsay and there was zero evidence in effect to conclude that the events occurred. Had proper notice been provided of their statements other witness' contradicting their statements would have been called. The applicant contends that he served 14 years of active duty with an excellent record. The proceedings were unfair and not impartial as required. His record was tarnished and does not allow him to receive benefits, which he wants to pass on to his children. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available at the time, the applicant does not have a mitigating Behavioral Health Disorder for the offenses which led to his discharge from the Army. Both the military and VA electronic medical records were reviewed. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 15 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: Unacceptable Conduct / AR 608-8-24, Paragraph 4-2b / JNC / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 February 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 December 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was required to show cause for retention on active duty under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraphs 4-18, due to misconduct. He was notified of the following reasons: fraternized and consumed alcohol with junior enlisted Soldiers (8 June 2012); demanded a junior enlisted Soldier and an unlicensed minor dependent drive to post to pick up his wife (9 June 2012); slapped his wife in the face in plain view of others (9 June 2012); threatened his wife with physical violence in front of his children, telling her that he would throw her off a balcony (9 June 2012); physically abused his wife by grabbing her around the neck and shoulders and shoving her into a wall (5 October 2012); and, made a false official statement when asked by Military Police Investigators if he had threatened to throw his spouse from the balcony. He answered in the negative and the question and his answer were captured in a sworn statement, which he signed under oath and his answer was false (16 October 2012). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 June 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board/BOI: On 22 May 2013, the BOI convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The BOI recommended the applicant's separation from the US Army with a general, (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. On 10 June 2013, the applicant voluntarily tendered his post Board of Inquiry (BOI) resignation from the Army under provisions of AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4, In Lieu of Further Elimination Proceedings. He voluntarily waived consideration of his case by a Board of Inquiry contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than honorable. On 3 July 2013, the General Officer Show Cause Authority (GOSCA) recommended disapproval of the applicant's request for resignation. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 26 September 2013, the Department of the Army Board of Review for Eliminations recommended that the applicant be involuntarily eliminated from the US Army based on misconduct and moral or professional dereliction, with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. On 9 October 2013, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) denied the applicant's conditional resignation in lieu of elimination and approved the Boards' recommendations to involuntarily eliminate the applicant from the US Army based on misconduct and moral or professional dereliction (AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b), with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 June 2008 / additional active duty service obligation (ADSO) of 6 years. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / BS (Information Systems Management) / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-4 / 25A Signal / 24 years, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 17 January 1990 to 13 February 1990 / NA IADT, 14 February 1990 to 26 July 1990 / UNC ARNG, 27 July 1990 to 19 July 1998 / NA ARNG ROTC/SMP, 20 January 1998 to 15 December 2000 / NA Commissioned 2LT / USAR, 16 December 2000 to 19 December 2000 / NA RA, 20 December 2000 to 1 June 2008 / HD / 3 years / OAD / critical skills retention bonus for an additional Active Duty service obligation (ADSO) of 3 years e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, Japan, SWA / Iraq (1 April 2003 to 3 February 2004 and 1 February 2011 to 1 October 2011) / f. Awards and Decorations: BSM, MSM, ARCOM-2, AAM-2, ARCAM-3, NDSM, ICM- CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, AFRM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR, JMUA g. Performance Ratings: 31 May 2008 thru 1 October 2011, Best Qualified 10 October 2011 thru 5 August 2012, Do Not Promote 22 August 2012 thru 21 August 2013, Best Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Counseling statement, dated 25 June 2012, advising the applicant of his duties and responsibilities while the inquiry is ongoing and until his departure. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 6 July 2012, for fraternizing by consuming an excess of alcohol with junior enlisted Soldiers on post at the Arena in violation of Army Regulation 600-20 paragraph, 4-I4b. In addition, he invited an E-3 back to his house and encouraged the Soldier to party with him. He demanded a junior enlisted Soldier and an unlicensed minor dependent drive to post to pick up his wife; and he slapped his wife in the face in plain view of others. Military Police Report, dated 5 October 2012, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for communicating a threat, conduct unbecoming an officer, assault, consummated by a battery, off post. GOMOR, dated 30 October 2012, his behavior over the past five months demonstrates a concerning pattern of domestic violence issues. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical Examination, undated, indicates the applicant had a diagnosis of anxiety and insomnia and prescribed medications for treatment. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Two DD Forms 293, one undated and unsigned. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 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. A discharge of honorable, general, or under other than honorable conditions characterization of service may be granted. 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." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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 Army officers. It brought discredit on the Army and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant' unacceptable conduct diminished the quality of his service below meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. The applicant contends that the president of the board disregarded regulation on three occasions; (1) notification that the government JAG would have two people present was not filed by the deadline, prior to the deadline it was stated there would be no testimony; (2), the president allowed admittance of documents that were not provided to his counsel prior to the board meeting as required; (3) the president of the board allowed members to question the applicant in direct violation of his choice to not answer questions. The evidence of record shows that GOSCA related that the applicant and his detailed counsel raised several allegations of procedural error; however, he found no corrective action was necessary. The applicant was provided a summary of the Board proceedings and notified the applicant he was entitled to a copy of the Board of Review Report. No election for a copy of the Board of Review Report was requested. The applicant further contends, the statements provided by the government's witnesses were complete hearsay and there was zero evidence in effect to conclude that events occurred; and had proper notice been provided of their statements other witness's contradicting their statements would have been called. The rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what he believes was an unfair discharge is not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature. The applicant also contends, he served 14 years of active duty with an excellent record. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant additionally contends, the proceedings were unfair and not impartial as required. 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 this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that the proceedings were unfair and not impartial. Lastly, the applicant contends, his record was tarnished and does not allow him to receive benefits he wants to pass on to his children. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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 15 February 2017, 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 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 AR20150017531 1