1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 February 2018 b. Date Received: 22 February 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an error in judgment and not on the fact that he honorably served the country for 11 years. He states, like most Soldiers, he is not perfect. He has always led from the front and inspired his Soldiers both on and off duty. He has successfully coached, mentored, and trained Soldiers from Private to Major, while always maintaining his professional bearing and tact. Despite his previous punishment, he continued to receive good evaluations and prior to his punishment, he had received mostly "Promote Ahead of Peers." He spent six years of his career quietly suffering from PTSD. He believed, like most Soldiers, he would lose his clearance or be pulled from a mission for seeking help at health. He states, he tried his best to keep his symptoms under control, but in the end, he succumbed to his demons. At the time of his judgment error, his lack of treatment and sleep, coupled with his ten year old daughter's sexual assault, was too much for him to bear and he made a mistake. Since his discharge, he has received treatment from the Veteran Affairs Hospital and found a job teaching. He mentions his accomplishments to demonstrate his character. He requests the Board grant him relief to reflect his eleven years of honorable service to the country and not his error in judgment. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD. However, due to the nature of the misconduct, PTSD is not a likely cause of misconduct. Therefore, a nexus between PTSD and the misconduct is not likely. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 2 May 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 and 4-24 / BNC / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 16 October 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 9 March 2017 (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 and c for acts of personal misconduct, moral or professional dereliction and derogatory information in his Army Military Human Resource Record, due to the following reasons: Substantiated derogatory activity resulting in a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 11 February 2016), which was filed in his Army Military Human Resource Record; Substantiated derogatory activity resulting in a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 30 November 2016, which was filed in his Army Military Human Resource Record; and, Conduct unbecoming an officer as indicated by the above-referenced GOMOR. (3) Legal Consultation Date: 21 March 2017 (4) GCMCA Recommendation Date / Characterization: On 24 July 2017, the GCMCA recommended disapproval of the applicant's request for resignation in lieu of elimination / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (5) DA Ad Hoc Review Board: The AD Hoc review board considered the applicant's request for resignation in lieu of elimination in accordance with AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 October 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 26 March 2008 / Indefinite b. Age at Appointment / Education / GT Score: 28 / Bachelor's Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-3 / 37A, Psychological Operations / 12 years, 1 month, 7 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 10 September 2005 - 21 September 2005 / NA IADT, 22 September 2005 - 2 March 2006 / HD USAR, 3 March 2006 - 21 March 2006 / HD RA, 22 March 2006 - 26 March 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Bahrain, SWA / Afghanistan (2 April 2010 - 7 March 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, BSM, JSCM, ARCOM, AAM-3, NATOMDL, MUC, VUA, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, MOVSM, CIB g. Performance Ratings: 19 March 2009 - 30 November 2010 / Best Qualified 18 February 2011 - 13 June 2011 / Best Qualified 14 June 2011 - 31 January 2014 / Best Qualified 1 February 2014 - 31 January 2016 / Highly Qualified 1 February 2016 - 27 September 2016 / Not Qualified 29 September 2016 - 3 January 2017 / Highly Qualified 4 January 2017 - 4 April 2017 / Highly Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Findings and Recommendations of 15-6 investigation of alleged fraternization (memo), dated 25 November 2015, reflects the investigating officer found that based on the preponderance of the evidence, the applicant and SSG U, did fraternize and were in a prohibited relationship, in violation of AR 600-20, paragraph 4-14(b) and (c), until they married on 12 November 2015. The investigating officer recommended that disciplinary action for the applicant for fraternization and for attempting to coerce a Soldier into providing false information to her chain of command. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 11 February 2011, for fraternization and for maintaining an inappropriate relationship with a noncommissioned officer. Prior to his marriage to the noncommissioned officer on 13 November 2015, he engaged in prohibited fraternization. Further, he degraded his integrity when he pressured a noncommissioned officer to lie and deny any knowledge of the relationship. Commander's Inquiry (memo), dated 24 September 2016, found that the applicant engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a student, while he was assigned as a cadre member. The applicant engaged in the relationship with the female student who was not his wife. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 30 November 2016, for engaging in an inappropriate relationship with a student, while he was assigned as a cadre member. The applicant engaged in the relationship with the female student who was not his wife. Report of Proceedings by Board of Officers, dated 23 May 2017, reflects the board found: The applicant engaged in an inappropriate relationship with CPT J C, resulting in a GOMOR, which was filed in the applicant's service record; The applicant fraternized and maintained an inappropriate relationship with SSG U, resulting in a GOMOR, which was filed in the applicant's service record; and, The applicant's actions amounted to conduct unbecoming of an officer. The Board recommended that the applicant be separated from service with a General (Under Honorable Conditions). i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Adult Preventative and Chronic Care Flowsheet, dated 4 April 2017, reflects the applicant had received treatment for: Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood The applicant provided a copy of his VA disability decision from the eBenefits website, which reflects the applicant was rated 30 percent disability for PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has received treatment from the Veteran Affairs Hospital and has gained employment. 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 "BNC" 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; and, 4-24a (1), resignation in lieu of elimination. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members' discharges. "Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre- existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service." "Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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 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 because it does not reflect his honorable service. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b and 4-24a (1), AR 600-8-24 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unacceptable Conduct," and the separation code is "BNC." 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. Further, 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 applicant contends the VA has granted him a service connected disability for PTSD. He contends his undiagnosed PTSD affected his behavior, which led 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 applicant's service record is void of a mental status evaluation. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. The applicant contends that he was dealing with his daughter's sexual assault, which 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 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 2 May 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 AR20180002949 4