1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 May 2017 b. Date Received: 6 May 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, material error of discretion with character of service and overall quality of service plus post service accomplishments warrants an honorable discharge. A prior records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 February 2016. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case file, AHLTA and JLV reviewed. AHLTA notes indicate applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with depression. AHLTA also documents a pattern of domestic abuse involving the applicant and his wife. Applicant was charged with assault and battery of spouse in 2009. He was again charged with aggravated assault toward his wife in 2012. He was seen regularly by BH while deployed for supportive therapy. His diagnosis remained Adjustment DO. BH stated several times that he screened negative for PTSD. JLV contains no information regarding applicant. Based on the available information, applicant does not have a mitigating BH condition. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 May 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 5 March 2013 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 12 December 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he committed domestic violence by committing assault and battery on his spouse (May 2012); he made a false official statement regarding the domestic violence incident (May 2012); he was convicted for both of these acts by summary court martial; and he attempted to procure the services of a prostitute for which he was reprimanded (January 2012). (3) Recommended Characterization: The unit commander recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. The intermediate and senior intermediate commanders recommended an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. (4) Legal Consultation Date: 2 October 2012 and 10 December 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board, contingent upon him receiving a characterization of services or description of separation no less favorable than under other than honorable conditions. However, he requested the Command to make recommendation to the separation authority to grant him a characterization of service no less favorable than general (under honorable conditions) discharge or better. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 January 2013 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 February 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 35 years / HS Graduate / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 92A20, Automated Logistical Specialist / 11 years, 3 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 29 December 2000 to 25 February 2001 / NA IADT, 26 February 2001 to 22 August 2001 / UNC ARNG, 23 August 2001 to 6 November 2001 / HD RA, 7 November 2001 to 22 December 2003 / HD RA, 23 December 2003 to 7 February 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea x2 / SWA / Kuwait, 30 July 2012 to 2 March 2013 / Afghanistan, 5 August 2009 to 14 May 2010 / Iraq x2, 16 May 2007 to 21 July 2008 and 8 September 2003 to 30 September 2004 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-5, AAM-3, AGCM-3, NDSM, ICM-2CS, ACM-CS, , GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, NOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-4, NATO MDL MUC, VUA g. Performance Ratings: 1 November 2007 to 3 December 2010, Among The Best 4 December 2010 to 1 November 2011, Fully Capable 8 November 2011 to 30 July 2012, Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Summary Court-Martial, dated 7 November 2012, the applicant was found guilty of; with intent to deceive, made a false official statement x2 (26 May 2012 and 31 May 2012); strike T.C. in the face with his fist (26 May 2012); and assault by slamming the door shut on the legs of T.C. between (1 January and 26 May 2012). He was sentenced to reduction to SPC / E-4, forfeiture of $1,575 pay for one month; restriction to the limits of Camp Arifjan for two months. A DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), see paragraph 4h above. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 December 2012, relates that the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of an adjustment disorder with depressed and anxious mood, alcohol abuse in remission. He has been followed at the BH clinic in Arifjan since his arrival to camp. This was the first time he sought treatment and has been in the context of the events which have formed the basis of the current proceedings against him. He is taking Zoloft 50mg and Trazodone 25mg. It was expected that he would not require ongoing treatment once his situation has resolved. The diagnosis of adjustment disorder reflects solely to his current situation, and not a chronic, longstanding difficulty. It does not impair his capacity to understand his situation. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages). 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. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service 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 a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment 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 characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors 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. Caution shall be exercised 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 an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than 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 military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By the misconduct (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general (under honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 seeks relief contending, material error of discretion with character of service and overall quality of service plus post service accomplishments warrants an honorable discharge. 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 contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his characterization of service was unjust. 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 record of evidence, the applicant did not submit any post service accomplishments. 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 document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): None. b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): Change narrative reason to Secretarial Authority. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 May 2018, 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 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 AR20170009245 5