1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 19 January 2017 b. Date Received: 21 February 2017 c. Counsel: None d. Previous Records Review: AR20070011412 on 29 August 2008 (Reconsideration due to PTSD claim) 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he served his country proudly and honorably. In Iraq, he went above and beyond his duties. While being the driver of an M1A1 Abrams Tank, which led the 3rd Inquiry Division into Baghdad, their tank was hit and immobilized by multiple PRGs. His tank commander/platoon sergeant was also shot in the arm. He and his crew were forced to dismount and take cover in an M2 Bradley. He performed first aide on his tank commander. After his crew was dropped off at a safe location, he volunteered to stay and pull security as the troops dismounted and mounted the Bradley. He was with that crew for a week before meeting up with his crew. He received awards for his actions and was nominated for a Bronze and Silver Star. However, he was informed that he did not receive those awards because he was a PFC. It is not fair now that those actions were overlooked because of the one mistake he greatly regrets. He would give anything to take it back and fulfill his Army career. Because of his services, he suffers from multiple mental disorders including PTSD, anxiety, and depression. Due to his current discharge, he is unable to receive help from VA for his problems. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case files, AHLTA and JLV were reviewed. AHLTA indicates applicant was seen for depression while in Army and diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder, single episode. For this condition, he received medication management and psychotherapy. VA records indicate he has diagnoses of PTSD due to combat (was tank driver in Iraq in 2003, tank was hit by an RPG and caught on fire), MDD and Cannabis Abuse. Based on the available information, the applicant does not have a mitigating mental health diagnoses. While it is true he has been diagnosed with PTSD and MDD, neither of these diagnoses is mitigating for the offenses of committing larceny, providing a false statement or engaging in wire fraud by diverting funds from an account by the internet. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 June 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 27 June 2005 c. Separation Facts: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 3 May 2006 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 6 April 2005, the following charges were preferred, with recommendations to refer to trial by a special court-martial empowered to adjudge a bad conduct discharge: Charge I: Violation of Article 80, UCMJ, for attempting to steal private funds electronically from the account of PFC R.C., on 10 December 2004. Charge II: Violation of Article 121, UCMJ, for stealing $1,200, the property of PFC R.C, on 20 December 2004. Charge III: Violation of Article 107, UCMJ, for making a false official statement to Special Agent E.A.W., on 20 December 2004. Charge IV: Violation of Article 134, UCMJ, for devising a scheme to defraud, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, to transmit by wire, in interstate commerce, writing for the purpose of executing such scheme, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, on 20 December 2004. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 24 May 2005 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 3 June 2005 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 June 2002 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 117 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 19K10, M1 Armor Crewman / 2 years, 11 months, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (10 January 2003 to 11 July 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; ICM; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; ASR; PUC (Army) g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c(1) and its associated documents (including a CID report). i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 19 January 2017. Additional evidence: Chart Review Diagnosis Entry Report, dated 2 November 2016, provides "No Entry" for diagnoses. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. AR 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 "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial." The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "KFS" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. 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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and he indicated he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. HRecord documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, the Board can find that his complete period of service and accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The applicant's contentions that because of his service, he suffers from multiple mental disorders including PTSD, anxiety, and depression, were carefully considered. A careful review of the available record revealed no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis or any behavioral health diagnoses, and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., documentary evidence of PTSD and/or behavioral health diagnoses), for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. The applicant contends his discharge is unfair due to the one-time incident that caused his discharge. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would provide him veterans' benefits, specifically VA healthcare. However, eligibility for veterans' benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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 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 29 June 2018, 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 AR20170003264 6