1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 September 2017 b. Date Received: 3 October 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the investigation into the alleged domestic violence incident was botched from the very beginning. Based on this poor investigation, an inaccurate police report was generated upon which a reprimand and chapter action were based. Although these errors were pointed out on more than one occasion, it appears that no one took the time to consider the evidence and make an independent decision. The decisions made by the commanders in this case were based only on the police report as there is no substantive evidence of anything else. Based on the obvious errors in the police report and the lack of any credible evidence of an assault, the applicant requests that an upgrade. The applicant further details his contentions in a self-authored statement. 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 mixed disturbance of mood and conduct, Acute Stress Reaction, Alcohol Abuse, and Adult Physical Abuse. VA records indicate the applicant has been diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder and has had instances of homelessness. The applicant is 30% service-connected for orthopedic issues. In summary, although the applicant had a BH diagnosis, it is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 April 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, homelessness, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of OBH), and post-service accomplishments. Therefore, the board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 23 May 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 31 March 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 1 May 2016, he struck his wife and attempted to choke her during a domestic dispute. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 7 April 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 21 April 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 January 2015 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92A10, Automated Logistical Specialist / 2 years, 4 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2, NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 19 August 2016, reflects the applicant was apprehended for Assault (Domestic Disturbance) on 1 May 2016. Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 28 November 2016, for striking his wife during a domestic dispute regarding his finances in his home, at or near Fort Hood, Texas. On or about 1 May 2016, he attempted to choke his wife and punched her in the head with a closed fist. Military police observed red marks on his wife's face immediately following the altercation. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 2 February 2017, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; case separation documents. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's 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. The applicant contends his separation from the Army was based on a botched investigation and without any evidence of physical assault. However, 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. 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): Legal Letter - 1 page b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 April 2019, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, homelessness, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service and post-service diagnoses of OBH), and post-service accomplishments. Therefore, the board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20170018235 3