1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 7 September 2017 b. Date Received: 11 September 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, through his military career, he had never been in trouble. The extra money that he received, was paid back to the Army in full before his appeal process was complete. During the time of his offense, he was legally separated from his spouse and was going through a long divorce process. Additionally, he was experiencing PTSD issues from the divorce process and from combat. He had already been processed through a medical board for his PTSD. He states, it has been hard for him to get a job to survive in today's environment and economy, because of his discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, although the applicant's psychiatric impairment is not being questioned, his Court-Martial offense, which involved a deliberate, intentional plan to obtain money he was not entitled to is not a kind of misconduct that PTSD mitigates. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 17 January 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: Court-Martial (Other) / AR 635-200, Chapter 3 / JJD / RE-4 / Bad Conduct b. Date of Discharge: 7 March 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Pursuant to Special Court-Martial Empowered to Adjudge a Bad-Conduct Discharge: As announced by Special Court-Martial Order Number 5, dated 13 May 2014, on 7 March 2014, the applicant was found guilty of the following: Charge I, in violation of Article 107, UCMJ: The Specification: Did, at or near Fort Stewart, Georgia, on or about 7 July 2012, with intent to deceive, sign an official document, to wit: DD Form 1351-2, which document was false in that the residence listed for his dependents was 885 3rd Avenue, Apt. C, New York, NY 10022, and was then known by the applicant to be so false. Plea: Guilty, except the words, "at or near Fort Stewart, Georgia, on or about 7 July 2012," substituting therefor the words, "at or near Yongson, Korea, between on or about 1 July 2010 and 15 June 2011." To the excepted words: Not Guilty; To the substituted words: Guilty. Finding: Guilty, except the words, "at or near Fort Stewart, Georgia, on or about 7 July 2012," substituting therefor the words, "at or near Yongson, Korea, between on or about 1 July 201 O and 15 June 2011." Of the excepted words: Not Guilty; Of the substituted words: Guilty. Charge II, in violation of Article 121, UCMJ: The Specification: Did, at or near Yongson, Republic of Korea, on divers occasions between on or about 11 June 2010 and on or about 10 July 2011, steal Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH), Cost of Living Allowance (COLA), and Dislocation allowance (DLA), of a value of about $26,408.51, the property of the United States Government. Plea: Guilty. Finding: Guilty. (2) Adjudged Sentence: Confined for a period of one month and to be discharged from the service with a Bad Conduct discharge. (3) Date/Sentence Approved: 13 May 2014 / only so much of the sentence, confinement for one month and a bad conduct discharge was approved and, except for that part of the sentence extending to a bad conduct discharge, would be executed. (4) Appellate Reviews: NIF (5) Date Sentence of BCD Ordered Executed: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 17 May 2012 / Indefinite b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 11B10, Infantryman / 14 years, 7 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 28 June 2001 - 28 December 2003 / HD RA, 29 December 2003 - 16 June 2005 / HD RA, 17 June 2005 - 30 June 2007 / HD RA, 1 July 2007 - 16 May 2012 / HD The applicant's DD Form 214, block 12e, reflects the applicant served 2 years, 6 months, and 1 day of Total Prior Inactive Service, however, the applicant's service record is void of any evidence of prior inactive service. e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, Korea, SWA / Iraq (23 January 2003 - 20 September 2003; 3 November 2006 - 14 December 2007) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-4, AAM-4, MUC, PUC, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ICM-CS, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-4, CIB g. Performance Ratings: 14 May 2012 - 13 May 2013 / Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Special Court-Martial Order as described in previous paragraph 3c. Two Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Confined by Military Authorities (CMA)" effective 7 March 2014; and, From "CMA" to "PDY," effective 2 April 2014. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 26 days (CMA, 7 March 2014 - 2 April 2014) j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Informal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) Proceedings, dated 20 June 2013, reflect the applicant was diagnosed with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder with comorbid adjustment disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application. 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 3, Section IV establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the ADRB to be established facts, issues relating to the applicant's innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the ADRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment. 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 bad conduct discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The service record indicates the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and the sentence was approved by the convening authority. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. The Board is empowered to change the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. The applicant contends that he was already going through a medical board for PTSD. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service PTSD; 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. It appears, the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by his court-marital conviction. The applicant contends that he was having family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends that he had good service which included two combat tours. 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 applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 17 January 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 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. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20170018057 4