1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 March 2017 b. Date Received: 1 May 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant through legal counsel requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to his narrative reason for discharge to "Secretarial Authority." The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that his TBI and PTSD were not fully explored by the command or board of inquiry at the time of his discharge. His pain management and medical history were profound and help to explain his increasingly bizarre behavior. He contends TBI and the psychological effects of his prior injuries and pain management altered his ability to think and behave clearly and appropriately. Considering his physical and psychological condition, a less-than-honorable discharge unfairly stigmatizes him. Also he believes any alleged misconduct is aberrational and inconsistent with his significant service record and accomplishments. It was a sign of something medically wrong with him, not a sign that he was unwilling to adhere to Army Values. Evidence of record shows the applicant had a prior records review on 4 April 2014. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant's AHLTA psychiatric diagnoses are diagnoses Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. He had a 2 hour MEB exam on 23 December 2009, with the Examiner noting a prior Diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with Anxious Mood was resolved, and adding that the applicant had no current Axis I or Axis II Disorder. The examiner noted the applicant had been seen in behavioral health 6 to 8 months before for problems related to his health, pain, and end of courtship, which were "completely resolved." He added the applicant met army medical retention standards for mental health and that the "SM [the applicant] concurs physical profile is S1." The resolution of the adjustment disorder was again noted on 10 January 2010 and, during his PEB exam, on 07 April 2010. His visits for Adjustment Disorder symptoms began on 31 August 2009. He told the examiner that he had a Ph.D. in psychology, a degree not reflected in the available records or the applicant's CV. The JLV showed the applicant to have a VA SC disability rating of 90%. His VA problem list include obstructive sleep apnea, insomnia and Adjustment Disorder with Anxious Mood. His 07 April 2010 exam did reference him being unable to work because of the impact his medications were having on his judgment. The available records provided insufficient evidence to mitigate the misconduct in this case. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 March 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: Unacceptable Conduct / AR 600-8-24, Paragraph 4-2b / JNC / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 27 February 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 30 October 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for a series of substantiated derogatory activity resulting in a referred service school academic evaluation report for the period 17 October 2006 through 23 March 2007; Two GOMORs dated 13 February 2007, and 21 April 2008 and a referred Officer Evaluation Report for the period 28 December 2007 through 14 April 2008 that were filed in his OMPF; and Conduct unbecoming an officer as indicated by the above-referenced items. (3) Recommended Characterization: NA (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant was directed to show cause for retention in the Army. He was advised that he could submit a sworn or unsworn statement, a rebuttal statement, or request for resignation in lieu of elimination. The applicant's chain of command recommended his case be referred to a show cause board. On 5 March 2010, the applicant was notified to appear before a board of officers and advised of his rights. (5) Administrative Separation Board / BOI: On 1 April 2010, the applicant appeared with counsel before a BOI (Show Cause Board). The Board found the applicant committed misconduct, moral or professional dereliction and conduct unbecoming an officer. The Board recommended separation from the US Army with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 10 June 2010, the BOI reconvened due to a procedural error when the BOI president with the SJA in a closed session during deliberations and incorporated the discussion into the record. However, the BOI again substantiated each of the bases for the initiation of separation and recommended that the applicant be separated from the Army with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 8 July 2010, the Commander, DA, HQS, Fort Bliss, TX indicated he reviewed the BOl proceedings and each of the appeals; and based upon this review he supports the BOI's findings. However, if the applicant's pending medical board recommends that he be medically retired from the Army, he recommend that his medical disability processing take precedence over the BOI's recommendation and he be separated from the Army with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 14 October 2010, the DA Ad Hoc Board of Review for Eliminations recommended the applicant's elimination action be accepted with issuance of a general (under honorable conditions) discharge (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 3 February 2011 / General Under Honorable Conditions (On 3 February 2011, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Board of Review and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Also the Physical Disability Board Proceedings were reviewed and found that the medical conditions were not a contributing factor to his misconduct and determined that he would not be medically discharged, but administratively for misconduct). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 September 2006 / 3 years (the documents extending his service until his discharge date are not in the file) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 38 / BS Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-3 / 25A, Signal / 23 years, 5 months, 19 days (block 12e of the DD Form 214 under review is incorrect and should read 7 years, 6 months, and 6 days) d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USMCR, (14 February1986 to 21 July 1986) / NA USMC, (22 July 1986 to 21 July 1992) / HD USMCR, (22 July 1992 to 12 April 1993) / NA AFANG, (13 April 1993 to 2 November 1993) / NA AD, (3 November 1993 to 18 February 1994) / HD AFANG, (19 February to 20 December 1994) / NA (Break-in-Service) AFANG, (13 July 1996 to 11 July 1998) / NA AD, (12 July 1998 to 18 January 1999) / HD AFNG, (19 January 1999 to 2 August 2002) / NA USAF, (3 August 2002 to 11 September 2006) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA, Korea / Saudi Arabia (20 May 1990 to 19 May 1991, prior service) f. Awards and Decorations: JSCM, ARCOM, AAM, NDSM-BS, SWASM-3, BSS, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, KLM-SA, KLM-KU, ASUA-2, MCGC, MCMM, NMCCAR, NUC, NMUC, NSSDR-2, ADAM, AFOUA, ARFMSM, AFLSAR-5, AFTR-2, AFOUTR, AFNPMEGR-2, JMUA g. Performance Ratings: The applicant received five OERs covering the periods 31 March 2007 through 15 July 2010. Of note, the OER covering the period 28 December 2007 through 14 April 2008, the applicant was rated as do not promote. h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The record contains two administrative General Officer Memoranda of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 9 April 2008 for conduct unbecoming an officer as the Rear Detachment Officer in Charge, engaged in inappropriate behavior with spouses of the 3/89th Cavalry Regiment Family Readiness Group (FRG), and 13 February 2007 for being apprehended for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. Two DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 23 March 2007 for achieving course standards in the Captains Career Course and the Battalion S-6 Officer Course. The record also contains Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings, dated 8 December 2010 which indicated the applicant was physically unfit and recommended a combined rating of 30 percent with a permanent disability retirement. The BOI proceedings, dated 1 April 2010 recommended the applicant be discharged from the service with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. A Military Police Report, dated 31 January 2007 indicated the applicant was under investigation for driving under the influence off post. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Chronological Records of Medical Care show the applicant suffered with problems for adjustment disorder with anxious mood as early as 2 September 2009. The applicant also suffered with issues with chronic neck and low back pain. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; letters of recommendation; resume; timeline; medication and conditions at the time of discharge; medical retirement paperwork; and medical records (service) 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Enclosure 2 (resume) of the documents submitted by the applicant shows he is employed and has received his Master of Arts Degree along with other formal training. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 600-8-24, Officer Transfers and Discharges, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security. A discharge of honorable, general, or under other than honorable conditions characterization of service may be granted. 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 through legal counsel requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to his narrative reason for discharge to "Secretarial Authority." 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. 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 requested a change to his narrative reason for discharge to "Secretarial Authority." However, Army Regulation 635-5-1 (separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separation Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JNC" as the appropriate code to assigned officer Soldiers, who are discharge under the provision of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 4, and paragraph 4-2b, unacceptable conduct. The regulation further stipulates no deviation is authorized. The applicant seeks relief contending, that his TBI and PTSD were not fully explored by the command or board of inquiry at the time of his discharge. His pain management and medical history were profound and help to explain his increasingly bizarre behavior. He contends TBI and the psychological effects of his prior injuries and pain management altered his ability to think and behave clearly and appropriately. Considering his physical and psychological condition, a less-than-honorable discharge unfairly stigmatizes him. Also he believes any alleged misconduct is aberrational and inconsistent with his significant service record and accomplishments. It was a sign of something medically wrong with him, not a sign that he was unwilling to adhere to Army Values. The applicant's contentions were noted; evidence in the record shows that a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings, dated 8 December 2010 indicates the applicant was physically unfit and recommended a combined rating of 30 percent with a permanent disability retirement for issues relating to his back and neck. Also that the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) reviewed the Physical Disability Board Proceedings and found that the medical conditions were not a contributing factor to his misconduct and determined that he would not be medically discharged, but administratively for misconduct). However, the service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder or TBI diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. 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 and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishments. It should be noted; AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-1 states, an officer is permitted to serve in the Army because of the special trust and confidence the President and the Nation have placed in the officer's patriotism, valor, fidelity, and competence. An officer is expected to display responsibility commensurate to this special trust and confidence and to act with the highest integrity at all times. However, an officer who will not or cannot maintain those standards will be separated. 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): Veterans Administration Medical Records - 80 pages b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None listed on the hearing data sheet. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 March 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 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 Code to: No Change f. Change 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 AR20170007578 5