1. Applicant's Name: Mr. a. Application Date: 25 July 2017 b. Date Received: 25 July 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the unit at the time conducted an investigation and found that the applicant did nothing wrong and the case was closed. The applicant continued a 13 year career for two years after the incident without any issues, only to appear before an administrative separation board, which recommended separation. The applicant has never been charged nor been to court for anything. Under provisions of AR 635-200, the discharge for misconduct (serious offense) is under other than honorable conditions. The applicant did not get the opportunity to sign the DD Form 214. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder with depressed mood, Anxiety Disorder, Concussion, Major Depressive Disorder, Opioid-Related Disorder, PTSD, and FAP Involvement. The applicant is 90% service-connected; 70% for PTSD from the VA. In summary, due to the basis of separation not being in file, there is insufficient evidence to determine if the applicant's BH diagnoses are mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 12 February 2020, 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: 23 June 2017 c. Separation Facts: No (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 8 May 2017, an enlisted administrative separation board met to review the evidence in the elimination case against the applicant. The Board found that the applicant assaulted his spouse L.W. was supported by a preponderance of the evidence and did warrant separation. Based on the findings, the Board recommended that the applicant be separated from the U.S. Army with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. The Board further recommended the separation be suspended for a period not to exceed 12 months. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 9 June 2017, after reviewing the administrative separation file for the applicant, the separation approving authority approved the Board's findings and disapproved the recommendation, in part. He directed the separation of the applicant from the U.S. Army with an Honorable characterization of service. He disapproved the recommendation to suspend the separation. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 January 2015 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 years / GED Certificate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 42A20, Human Resources Specialist / 25B20, Information Technology Specialist / 25F10, Network Switching System Operator / Maintainer / 13 years, 4 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 28 January 2004 to 1 January 2008 / HD RA, 2 January 2008 to 9 January 2012 / HD RA, 10 January 2012 to 20 January 2015 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / SWA / Qatar, 6 February 2007 to 7 February 2008 / Iraq, 23 April 2011 to 23 November 2011 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-3, AGCM-3, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR, MUC g. Performance Ratings: 1 March 2014 to 28 February 2015, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Law Enforcement Report, dated 13 October 2015, revealed the applicant was under investigation for assault upon his wife. Investigation determined the applicant and his wife were involved in a verbal altercation, which turned physical when the applicant struck Mrs. L.W., with a closed fist. The applicant was apprehended and transported to the MP Station where he was advised of his legal rights, which he invoked. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application (six pages); and a DD Form 214. 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, 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's digital signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of honorable. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JKQ (i.e., misconduct (serious offense) with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3. The applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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 regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. The applicant seeks relief contending, his unit at the time conducted an investigation and found that he did nothing wrong and the case was closed; and he has never been charged nor been to court for anything. However, an investigation determined that the applicant and his wife were involved in a verbal altercation, which turned physical when the applicant struck Mrs. L.W., with a closed fist. On 24 September 2015, a CID Investigator coordinated with the 3-1 Brigade SJA, who opined probable cause to believe the offense of assault consummated by battery was committed. This case was closed in the files of this office pending the receipt of additional information / evidence that would warrant its reopening. This was a final report. The applicant further contends, he continued his 13 year career for two years after the incident without any issues, only to appear before an administrative separation board, which recommended separation. The available 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 applicant also contends, under provisions of AR 635-200, the discharge for misconduct (serious offense) is under other than honorable conditions. 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. The applicant additionally contends, he did not get the opportunity to sign his DD Form 214. The record of evidence shows that the applicant was unavailable to sign his DD Form 214. The record did not contain any information as to why the applicant was unavailable, If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it is his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. Based on the available record, 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 12 February 2020, 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 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 AR20170011214 1