1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 8 August 2019 b. Date Received: 9 August 2019 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, in effect, he was diagnosed with PTSD after his second deployment. He tried to seek treatment for PTSD symptoms instead of deploying again, his commander called him a "mentally weak leader." His commander saw to it he was separated from the Army with a general character of service. Prior to his PTSD he served his country and the Army honorably. His condition affected his professional life and most importantly his family. His command began targeting him and things got worse. The fear and anxiety that he was dealing with triggered his PTSD and he began to lash out at his leadership. His command accused him of misconduct because of his behavior after he told them he was mentally unstable. Instead of helping him the was punished. He is homeless and trying to make it one day at a time. 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 PTSD, which was later removed. However, a VA provider diagnosed combat related PTSD and he is 30% service connected for the same. The VA also diagnosed him with MDD. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 2 October 2020, 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 4-2 and 4-24 / BNC / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 12 August 2019 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 16 January 2019 (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 4-2 and 4-24, due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or in the interests of national security. He was notified of the following reasons; Conduct unbecoming of an officer as indicated by his decision to impersonate a commissioned officer with intent to gather information about an investigation for which he was listed as the subject and making a false official statement by stating that he did not call CID impersonating a commissioned officer. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 22 January 2019, and on 28 February 2019, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and tendered his unconditional resignation from the Army under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, chapter 4, in lieu of further elimination proceedings. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 28 February 2019, the applicant voluntarily waive consideration of his case by a Board of Inquiry contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, (under honorable conditions). On 18 March 2019, The Commanding General; Headquarters, US Army Center for Initial Military Training, Fort Eustis, VA 23604-5701, after careful consideration of the applicant's case and his resignation in lieu of elimination, he recommended that the applicant's resignation in lieu of further elimination proceedings be approved and that he receive a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: On 25 July 2019, The Department of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board reviewed the resignation in lieu of elimination tendered by the applicant. The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Army Review Boards) accepted his resignation and was discharged from the United States Army with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service. This elimination is based on misconduct and moral or professional dereliction (Army Regulation 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 September 2010 / Voluntary Indefinite / block 12a on the applicant's DD Form 214 date entered active duty this period is incorrect, should read as annotated in the Case Report and Directive. See active duty orders A-01-001928. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 32 years / BS Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-3 / 56A Command / Unit Chaplain / 17 years, 10 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 11 January 1996 to 17 June 1996 / NA RA, 18 June 1996 to 19 May 1999 / GD (Break in Service) ARNG, 20 December 2000 to 12 November 2001 / NA AD, 13 November 2001 to 16 December 2001 / NA ARNG, 17 December 2001 to 28 July 2002 / HD RA, 29 July 2002 to 28 July 2005 / HD (Break in Service) USNR, 30 November 2005 to 28 July 2006 / NA (Break in Service) ARNG, 28 September 2007 to 28 September 2008 / HD RA, 29 September 2008 to 11 May 2010 / HD Appointed 2LT / RA, 12 May 2010 to 14 September 2010 / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait / Iraq, 12 April 2003 to 12 April 2004 / Afghanistan, 24 December 2012 to 10 September 2013 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-4, AAM, NDSM, ICM-ARRWHD DEV, ICM-CS, ICM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-3, NATO MDL g. Performance Ratings: 10 June 2010 to 18 August 2013, Best Qualified 17 January 2015 16 January 2016, Highly Qualified 17 January 2016 to 9 January 2018, Most Qualified 10 January 2018 to 18 June 2018, Highly Qualified 19 June 2018 to 7 March 2019, Not Qualified, Referred Report h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: An Administrative General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 16 January 2019, for impersonating a commissioned officer with intent to gather information about an investigation for which he was listed as the subject. He also made a false official statement to COL B., by stating he did not call CID. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Psychiatric discharge summary, dated 26 February 2019, relates the applicant was diagnosed with major depressive disorder, single episode, moderate by history, PTSD by history, relationship distress with spouse or intimate partner and other problems related to employment. Chronological record of medical care, dated 12 March 2019, revealed the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with disturbance of mood and conduct. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 28 March 2019, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct, occupational problems. He did not have a BH condition that causes him to fail medical retention standards in accordance with AR 40-501. The medical record does not contain evidence that the applicant met criteria for a condition requiring referral to IDES, but has not yet received a diagnosis. There was no evidence that he had any current psychiatric issues which were medically unacceptable or that should preclude separation. He was cleared psychologically for separation from the Army. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages, 23 September 2019); letter, R.C. Retirement, Inc.; support statement, DD Form 214; NGB Form 22; casualty list; and medical documents (19 pages); and a DD Form 293 (two pages, 8 August 2019); psychiatric discharge summary (six pages); DD Form 214 (28 July 2005); NGB Form 22 (28 September 2008); chronological record of medical care (11 pages). 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. 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 officer Soldiers 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 requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for separation. 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 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 requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. Army Regulation 635- 5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating officer 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 officer Soldiers, who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraphs 4-2 and 4 -24, unacceptable conduct. The regulation further stipulates no deviation is authorized. The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, he was diagnosed with PTSD after his second deployment; and his condition affected his professional life and most importantly his family. The applicant provided a psychiatric discharge summary, relates the applicant was diagnosed with major depressive disorder, single episode, moderate by history, PTSD by history, relationship distress with spouse or intimate partner and other problems related to employment. The applicant further contends, he tried to seek treatment for PTSD symptoms instead of deploying again, his commander called him a "mentally weak leader;" his commander saw to it he was separated from the Army with a general characterization of service; and his command began targeting him and things got worse; his command accused him of misconduct because of his behavior after he told them he was mentally unstable; and instead of helping him the was punished. 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 also contends, prior to his PTSD he served his country and the Army honorably. 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 additionally contends, the fear and anxiety that he was dealing with triggered his PTSD and he began to lash out at his leadership. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that fear and anxiety triggered his PTSD. Lastly, the applicant contends, he is homeless and trying to make it one day at a time. Eligibility for housing supportive program benefits for Veterans does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. Moreover, all veterans at risk for homelessness or attempting to exit homelessness can request immediate assistance by calling the National Call Center for Homeless Veterans hotline at 1-877-424-3838 for free and confidential assistance. 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 October 2020, 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 AR20190011030 4