1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 October 2017 b. Date Received: 8 January 2018 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant, through counsel, requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, initially excelled in training as an officer at Fort Huachuca, but then discovered that a married officer was having a relationship with a member of the staff of the hotel that they were staying in. The applicant informed the officer's instructors and the manager of the hotel. The staff member was ultimately terminated from employment. The staff member, in retaliation, fabricated information and submitted it as evidence against the applicant claiming the applicant was the person involved in this relationship, although the training environment made this impossible. Based upon these accusations, the applicant was denied the ability to graduate. A hold was put on the applicant's security clearance making it impossible to do the job. The applicant could not deploy with fellow Soldiers and was asked to work at the Battalion where they assigned busy work to occupy time. Eventually the applicant was informed of a letter of reprimand that would disappear from the record once the applicant received a permanent change of station. The applicant started looking for a new assignment, but then found out that someone in Afghanistan "accidently" revoked a security clearance making it impossible to obtain a permanent change of station until it was reinstated. The stress of the wrongful accusation and the inability to do the job was more than the applicant could bear. The applicant tried to commit suicide by overdosing on the wife's pain medication from a recent back surgery. Within a few days of attempting to take one's life, the applicant participated in a company-wide urinalysis and failed. That is when the applicant admitted to the suicide attempt. The Chaplain and Commander felt that the applicant should get checked out and was later admitted to a mental facility where the doctor stated the applicant was suffering from severe depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The applicant believed that a medical review would be required, but before the medical review process was completed, the applicant was informed that the chain of command would be pursuing a discharge. The applicant ultimately received a 50 percent disability rating connected to service for PTSD with major depressive disorder, also claimed as nightmare disorder, anxiety, chronic insomnia, and sleep disorder. The applicant was suffering from PTSD and severe depression and should have been processed simultaneously for both administrative separation and physical disability evaluation. Under this process, the Commanders exercising general court-martial authority would have ensured that the foregoing actions processed together were properly identified and cross- referenced. The applicant was administratively discharged without proper consideration given to his physical disability and referral to the Office of the Secretary of the Army for a proper disposition. The applicant's conduct as a Soldier was in keeping with the standards expected of a young Soldier and was honorable up until a single instance of misconduct. Prior to becoming an officer he had served admirably in the enlisted ranks, earning numerous badges, awards, medals, and promotions, including combat service in Afghanistan. The applicant was on the way to enjoying a fruitful and honorable Army career before the stress of the false accusation and the months of frustration and inability to do the job while awaiting disposition of the accusation, combined with severe depression and PTSD caused the applicant to take controlled substances in an attempt to commit suicide. 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: Depressive Disorder NOS, Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depressed Mood, and Major Depressive Disorder. The applicant's in-service treatment team determined the applicant did not have PTSD. Based on a self-report, the applicant has a 50% service- connected rating for PTSD. Based on the available information, the applicant has a Behavioral Health condition that is partially mitigating for the drug abuse but not the other misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 December 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, Chapter 4-2B / JNC / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 6 November 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 June 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed to show cause for retention on active duty under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraphs 4-2b (5), (8) and (11) for his personal acts of misconduct. He was engaged in an adulterous relationship from on or about May 2012 to on or about July 2012, and subsequently lied to Military Police Investigations (MPI): Series of substantiated derogatory activity resulting in a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 21 November 2012. He was reprimanded because: He was involved in a sexual relationship with a woman who was not his wife. He made two false sworn statements to MPI, denying that he sent sexually explicit pictures of himself to the woman and had a sexual relationship with her. Conduct unbecoming an officer as indicated by the above-referenced GOMOR. He wrongfully used oxymorphone. (3) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (4) GCMCA Recommendation Date / Characterization: 6 September 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (5) DA Ad Hoc Review Board: On 3 October 2013, the DA Ad Hoc Review Board reviewed the applicant's case and recommended that he be discharged from the Army with a General (Under Honorable Conditions). (6) Deputy Assistant Secretary Army (Review Boards): On 10 October 2013, the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary Army (Review Boards) determined the applicant would be involuntary eliminated from the Army with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 2 December 2010 / Indefinite b. Age at Appointment / Education / GT Score: 30 / Associate's Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: WO2 / 351M, Human Intelligence Technician / 12 years, 11 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 8 November 2000 - 29 August 2005 / HD RA, 30 August 2005 - 7 June 2006 / HD RA, 8 June 2006 - 1 December 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, SWA / Afghanistan (1 January 2009 - 9 December 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, MSM, ARCOM-3, AAM-2, MUC, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-2, MOVSM, NATOMDL, CAB g. Performance Ratings: 2 December 2010 - 19 April 2012 / Best Qualified 20 April 2012 - 30 November 2012 / Fully Qualified 1 December 2012 - 31 October 2013 / Do Not Promote h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Electronic Copy of DD Form 2624, dated 10 April 2010, reflects the applicant tested positive for OXMOR 162 (oxymorphone), during an Inspection Random (IR) urinalysis testing, conducted on 2 April 2013. Report of Proceedings by Investigating Officer/Board of Officers, dated 23 August 2012, reflects the investigating officer found: There was strong corroboration of evidence indicating that the applicant did in fact text Ms. X many times on or about 14 June 2012 to 13 July 2012; The strong sexual nature of the texts between Ms. B and the applicant's number, including two photos or male genitals, indicate that the two were in a relationship that was more than casual. The confirmation of adulterous behavior could not be fully corroborated; The poems and the source of the notes could not be corroborated. The statements made in the notes and poems did not clearly indicate an intent to harm Ms. X or her family; and, The evidence available indicates the existence of a relationship between Ms. X and the applicant of a sexual nature conducted through communications over the phone. Because the applicant was in an official capacity while staying in Sierra Vista and he participated in these communications with Ms. X., he misrepresented the standard of behavior expected of Warrant Officers in the United States Army through poor judgement. Sierra Vista, Injunction Against Harassment, dated 16 July 2012, ordered the applicant not to have contact with Ms. X. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 21 November 2012, for engaging in and adulterous relationship and subsequently lying under oath to Military Police Investigators (MPI). From May 2012 until July 2012, he was involved in a sexual relationship with a woman who was not his wife while attending the Army Advanced Source Operation Course (ASOC) in Sierra Vista, Arizona. After the relationship ended, the woman obtained a restraining order against the applicant and the ASOC command denied his graduation. Further, he made two sworn statements to MPI, denying that he sent sexually explicit pictures of himself to the woman and that he had a sexual relationship with her, both of which were true. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 26 June 2013, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with: Occupational problem. The applicant provided a copy of his VA disability rating decision, dated 8 February 2017, which reflects the applicant was rated 50 percent disability for PTSD with major depressive disorder, also claimed as nightmare disorder, anxiety, chronic insomnia and sleep disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with allied legal brief and all listed enclosures. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states that he has obtained employment and earned his Bachelor's Degree and MBA. 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. Army Regulation 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 "JNC" as the appropriate code to assign commissioned officers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 4-2b, unacceptable conduct. 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 counsel, requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. 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 Army officers. It brought discredit on the Army and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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. Further, the applicant's record contains no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b, AR 600-8-24 with a honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unacceptable Conduct," and the separation code is "JNC." 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 and separation code, entered in block 26 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 Veterans Administration has granted him a service connected disability for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (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. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service occupational problem; 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 26 June 2013, 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 applicant contends that he should have been processed for a medical discharge at the same time that he was being considered for elimination. However, 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 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 applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. 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 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 19 December 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 AR20180000682 1