1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 May 2017 b. Date Received: 4 May 2017 c. Counsel: None 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 discharge was inequitable because the misconduct was a result of PTSD. The applicant acted in a way that was uncharacteristic. Since discharge, the applicant has lived life by the Army core values and supporting documents will show. The applicant is still undergoing treatment for PTSD and has hopes of being able to leave an honorable legacy for two sons to follow. 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 no electronic medical records due to the applicant's service timeframe. VA records indicate the applicant has been diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder NOS, and PTSD. The applicant is 70% service-connected for PTSD through the VA. In summary, although the applicant has a BH diagnosis, it is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 February 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: Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 15 October 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 9 September 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant did, at or near Fort Lewis, Washington, between on or about 1 December 2003 and 20 May 2004, with intent to deceive, make to Dr. J E-B, M.D., divers official statements, to wit: "while deployed in Iraq, I witnessed the deaths of several Special Forces team members and the suicide of a Soldier," or words to that effect, which statements were totally false, and were known by the applicant to be so false; and, The applicant, did, at or near Fort Lewis, Washington, between on or about 1 December 2003 and 20 May 2004, for the purpose of avoiding his duty as a Ground Surveillance Systems Operator (96R) and deployment to and service in Iraq, feign symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 September 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 24 September 2004 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 November 2000 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 96R1P Ground Surveillance Systems Operator / 3 years, 11 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Italy / Iraq (NIF) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of result of Trial, reflects the applicant was tried in a Summary Court-Martial on 11 August 2004. The applicant was charged with two specifications. The summary of offenses, pleas and findings: Violation of Article 107, UCMJ: With intent to deceive, make an official statement to Dr. B, a false statement, which was known to be false on or about 1 December 2003 and 20 May 2004. Guilty, consistent with the plea. Violation of Article 115, UCMJ: With intent to avoid military duties, feign symptoms of Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder. Guilty, consistent with the plea. Sentence: To be reduced to Private First Class E-3, to forfeit 2/3rds pay per month for 1 month, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 15 January 2005, extra duty for 30 days, restriction to the limits of the barracks, dining facility, place of duty, place of worship, medical and dental facilities for 60 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated13 August 2004, 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. Several Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his VA benefits summary, dated 20 January 2017, reflects the applicant is rated 70 percent service- connected disabled; however, the letter did not list any specific disabilities. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; VA Summary Of Benefits; Award Certificate; and, two character statements. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has lived his life by the Army core values and he is still undergoing treatment for PTSD. He provided evidence that he was recognized for his Esprit de Corps, by the Department of Criminal Justice. 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. 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 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 service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation as Misconduct. The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Pattern of Misconduct." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends the he has PTSD, which affected his behavior and lead to his discharge. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. The record shows that on 13 August 2004, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. Notwithstanding the administrative error, based on the available record, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 February 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 AR20170007422 5