1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 November 2016 b. Date Received: 7 November 2016 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, he desires the upgrade, which will allow him veteran's benefits for him and his family. He states, all other aspects of his service were satisfactory. One incident should not decide the characterization of his discharge. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 January 2018, 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 (Civil Conviction) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14, Sec II / JKB / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 25 October 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 August 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He was convicted of Cruelty and Injuries to Children by the Virginia Beach Circuit Court on 10 January 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 11 September 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 11 September 2013, the applicant unconditionally waived consideration of his case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 October 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 August 2012 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 30 / HS Graduate / 128 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 7 years, 7 months, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 8 March 2006 - 23 August 2012 / GD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (1 September 2006 - 9 May 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Letter of Concern, dated 13 July 2010, reflects the applicant's commander expressed his concern about the applicant's off-duty conduct in regards to the alleged assault of his six-year- old son. The applicant was investigated for this alleged misconduct and Child Protective Services temporarily removed him from his home. During the investigation, it was determined that the applicant had spanked his son with such force as to cause contusions. Simply because charges were not filed by this Command for assault, did not take away from the seriousness of this situation and the negative perception and visibility he had brought against himself. Commonwealth of Virginia, In the Circuit Court of the City Of Virginia Beach, court document, dated 7 September 2010, named the applicant as the defendant in a Grand Jury Indictment for Child Cruelty. On or about Tuesday, 2 February 2010, employing or having the custody of L.C., willfully or negligently caused or permitted the life of such child to be endangered or the health of such child to be injured or to cause or permit such child to be overworked, tortured, tormented, mutilated, beaten or cruelly treated, in violation of § § 40 .1-103; 18.2-10 of the Code of Virginia (1950) as amended. Electronic court case search, reflects the applicant was found guilty to the felony charge of Cruelty and Injuries to Children (2 February 2010) on 1 October 2012. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 5 July 2013, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The reported noted a "Psychiatric Examination Requested by Authority" (AXIS I). Per the Board Medical Officer: "The medical examiner should have listed No Diagnosis for AXIS I; however, it appears that the reason for the exam was incorrectly listed for Axis I, which was a Psychiatric Exam Requested by Authority." Report of Medical History, dated 1 July 2013, the applicant noted he had been medically evacuated from Iraq to the behavioral health at Fort Eustis. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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. 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, 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. 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. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that a Soldier may be separated when initially convicted by civil authorities, or when action is taken that is tantamount to a finding of guilty, if a punitive discharge authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts Martial or the sentence by civil authorities includes confinement for 6 months or more, without regard to suspension or probation. The applicant contends the event that caused his discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that he had good service, which included a combat tour. 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 is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow veterans benefits. However, 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 that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 January 2018, 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 new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160018735 2