1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 December 2017 b. Date Received: 23 January 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, was on an extension for deployment and was supposed to be honorably discharged due to an injury and health concerns. The awards from service were not updated. The applicant alleges being told the applicant would have an honorable discharge and the creditable service would be updated. The applicant requests an upgrade for time served, awards and discharge type. 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 Marital Problem, Occupational Problem, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. The applicant is 70% service- connected for Major Depressive Disorder from the VA. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with PTSD, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and MST. In summary, the applicant has a BH diagnosis that is partially mitigating for separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 April 2020, and by a 3-2 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 August 2011 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 July 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons for his discharge; he was involved in a spousal abuse and simple assault dispute with his wife J.B. (9 May 2011); and he violated a lawful order from SSG K.B., not to have any contact with his wife J.B., between (17 May 2011 and 18 May 2011). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 July 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 August 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 March 2008 / 3 years, 16 weeks / 7 months extension / 18 March 2010. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 years / HS Graduate / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 5 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 1 September 2008 to 8 January 2009 f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, VUA g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 10 May 2011, reflects the applicant was under investigation for simple assault, spouse abuse-civilian female victim, on post. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 11 May 2011, revealed the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of marital problem. His mental status was clear. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for violating a no contact order, domestic violence, disobeying a lawful order; and being informed of pending separation action. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); DD Form 149 (two pages); and a letter, Otter Tail County Veterans Service Office. 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 the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents 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 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, he was on an extension for deployment and was supposed to be honorably discharged due to an injury and health concerns. This contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued. 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 applicant further contends, his awards from his service were not updated. The applicant's requested changes to the DD Form 214 do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. The applicant also alleges being told he would have an honorable discharge and his creditable service would be updated. The applicant bears the burden of presenting 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 he would receive an honorable discharge and his creditable service would be updated. Block 12c, net active service this period on the applicant DD Form 214 is correct as it reads, 3 years, 5 months, 4 days. Lastly, the applicant requests an upgrade for time served, awards and discharge type. 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 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 8 April 2020, and by a 3-2 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: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 5-3 e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change Authenticating Official: SECRETARIAL REVIEWING AUTHORITY (SRA): While the Board majority found your separation was both proper and equitable; as the Secretarial Reviewing Authority, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Review Boards) reviewed the findings, conclusions, and the board's recommendation under the authority of Title 10 United States Code Section 1553(b) and Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 (Discharge Review Board (DRB) Procedures and Standards), enclosure E3.7.1.1.1. The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Review Boards) found sufficient evidence to upgrade the characterization of service to Honorable. Therefore, your DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) will be corrected by issuing you a new DD Form 214 changing the characterization of service to Honorable; the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 5; and the narrative reason to Secretarial Authority. 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 AR20180003481 1