1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 February 2017 b. Date Received: 13 March 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, in effect, whether the issuance of the discharge received was unduly severe based on a distinguished service record. 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 the following behavioral health diagnoses: Adjustment Disorder with depressed mood. The VA has not service-connected the applicant and notes zero diagnoses. In summary, the applicant did not have a mitigating behavioral health diagnoses for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 January 2019 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 608-8-24, Paragraphs 4-2b and 4-24a(1) / BNC / NA / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 18 January 2017 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 22 March 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was required to show cause for retention on active duty under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraphs 4-2b(5) for acts of personal misconduct and 4-2b(8), for conduct unbecoming an officer. He was notified of the following reasons: acts of personal misconduct documented in an AR 15-6 investigation; and conduct unbecoming an officer as indicated by the above-referenced AR 15-6 investigation. (3) Recommended Characterization: On 1 April 2016, The Commanding General; Headquarters, Eighth Army, APO AP 96205-5236, recommended that the applicant be allowed to resign in lieu of elimination; if separated from the Army he further recommended a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 March 2016 On 24 March 2016, the applicant voluntarily tendered his resignation from the Army under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4, in lieu of further elimination proceedings. (5) Administrative Separation Board/BOI: Applicant elected to waive his right to appear before a board of officers (BOI). On 8 December 2016, The Department of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board has reviewed the Resignation in Lieu of Elimination tendered by the applicant. The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Review Boards) accepted his resignation and he was discharged from the US Army with an under other than honorable conditions characterization if service. This elimination is based on misconduct and moral or professional dereliction (Army Regulation 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 December 2016 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 April 2002 / Voluntary Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 years / BS Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-5 / 25A, Signal / 20 years / 4 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR (Cadet), 27 August 1996 to 14 May 1999 / NA USAR, Appointment 2LT, 15 May 1999 to 18 May 1999 / NA RA, 19 May 1999 to 31 March 2002 / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / SWA / Iraq x4, 1 March 2003 to 20 January 2004, 18 November 2005 to 19 November 2006, 4 September 2007 to 5 October 2007 and 10 January 2008 to 11 April 2008 / Afghanistan, 11 August 2008 to 20 November 2008 / Djibouti, 27 November 2008 to 27 November 2008 / Qatar, 25 August 2009 to 25 September 2010 f. Awards and Decorations: BSM-2, PH, DMSM, MSM-2, ARCOM-V DEV-2, ARCOM-2, AAM-6, NDSM, ICM-3CS, ACM-CS, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-3, CAB, JMUA, VUA, MUC g. Performance Ratings: 24 May 2002 to 31 December 2013, Best Qualified 1 January 2014 to 1 May 2015, Most Qualified 2 May 2015 to 29 January 2016, Not Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant received a negative counseling statement, dated 7 January 2016, for engaging in a prohibited relationship with a subordinate officer. DD Form 458, Charge Sheet, dated 18 February 2016, shows the same charges in the GO Article 15. Pre-trial offer and agreement, the applicant agreed to plead guilty to all charges and specifications as alleged in charges preferred against him on 18 February 2016 at a General Officer Article 15 proceeding. As an express condition of this offer and agreement, he agreed that when he is served with the initial notification of the separation, he would tender his unconditional resignation in lieu of elimination no later than 48 hours after receipt. GO Article 15, dated 1 April 2016, for failing to obey a lawful general regulation, by wrongfully engaging in a dating and sexual relationship with 2LT X., a subordinate officer under his command on divers occasions between (5 June 2015 and 22 December 2015); fail to obey a lawful general regulation, by repeatedly visiting bars and private residences with subordinate lieutenants and repeatedly consuming alcohol with subordinate lieutenants between (5 June 2015 and 18 December 2015); being a married man, did wrongfully have sexual intercourse with 2LT X, a woman not his wife, such conduct being prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, on divers occasions, between (1 October 2015 and 20 December 2015); having received a lawful command on 22 December 2015 from COL X., his superior commissioned officer, to "initiate no contact or communication with 2LT X," or words to that effect, did willfully disobey the same by sending 2LT X., text messages and electronic mail and leaving her letters and gifts at between (23 December 2015 and 7 January 2016), having received a lawful command on 22 December 2015 from COL X., his superior commissioned officer, to remain at least 50 feet away from 2LT X and her residence, or words to that effect, did willfully disobey the same (5 January 2016); did unlawfully grab 21LTX scarf and push her with his hands against an elevator wall (11 December 2015); and with intent to deceive, make to COL X, official statements, "I never entered 2LT Xs room," "I don't know her room number," and "I don't have her access code," or words to that effect, which statements were false in that you had entered 2LT X room, you did know her room number, and he did have her access code, and was then known by him to be so false (23 December 2015); forfeiture of $4,079 for two months and restriction for 60 Days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 27 April 2016, relates the applicant had an Axis I diagnosis of adjustment disorder with depressed mood. He was screened for PTSD and TBI. These conditions were either not present or, if present, do not meet AR 40-501 criteria for a medical evaluation board. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); Exhibit 1, DD Form 214 (two pages); Exhibit 2, Officer Record Brief; Exhibit 3, withdrawal and dismissal of charges; Exhibit 4, Charge Sheet (two pages); Exhibit 5, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (DASA), approval of the applicant's resignation; Exhibit 6, applicant's letter (two pages); Exhibit 7, 22 OERs; Exhibit 8, seven support statements; Exhibit 9, seven AAM Certificates, four ARCOM Certificates, recommendation for award / with narrative; two Bronze Star Certificates; CAB Orders 269-02, Defense Meritorious Service Medal Certificate; Memorandum for Record, acceptance and wear of German Parachute Badge (two pages), announcement of award of the Joint Meritorious Unit Award, Joint Meritorious Unit Award Citation, Memorandum for the Commandant, award of the Joint Meritorious unit Award, Master parachutist badge, Meritorious Service Medal Certificate, two Purple Heart Orders 164-05 / with Citation, Purple Heart Citation; personnel action, and a Valorous Unit Award Certificate. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 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 requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than 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 Army officers. It brought discredit on the Army and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant's unacceptable conduct diminished the quality of his service below meriting a general (under honorable conditions) an honorable discharge at the time of separation. The applicant provided no corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the unacceptable conduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on active duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, the issuance of the discharge he received was unduly severe based on his distinguished service record. 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 service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of officers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline 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 9 January 2019 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 AR20170003790 1