1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, served honorably stateside and in Iraq for more than 13 years as reflected in a previous DD Form 214 upon return from deployment. The applicant claims applicant's PTSD is a result of time spent on the battlefield. Even as a logistics Soldier, the applicant claims applicant was forced by the chain of command to go on over 100 convoys in Iraq in the Fallujah, Ramadi, Baghdad, Tikrit areas. The applicant claims applicant was involved in numerous hostile attacks, witnessing countless deaths and injuries. Since then the applicant received countless treatments, and therapies and medication. The applicant claims applicant has been on medication since 2004. The applicant claims applicant's mind; body, and soul was not right when making the mistake which caused the discharge. The applicant claims applicant served almost 15 years, and the majority of the time was honorable. The applicant claims applicant's judgement and everything in life was clouded due to the multiple disabilities and PTSD. In a records review conducted on 16 June 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unacceptable Conduct / AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4-2b and 4-24a (1) / BNC / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 24 September 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 30 May 2012 (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 for acts of personal misconduct and conduct unbecoming of an officer, due to the following reasons: AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b (5) (misconduct, moral professional dereliction, acts of personal misconduct). Specifically, the applicant participated in the sale and receipt of stolen U.S. Government property worth approximately $10 million. AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b (8) (misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or in the interests of national security, conduct unbecoming an officer). Specifically, the circumstances described above constitute conduct unbecoming an officer and gentlemen. (3) Legal Consultation Date: On 30 May 2012, the applicant waived legal counsel. (4) GOSCA Recommendation Date / Characterization: On 27 June 2012, the GOSCA recommended approval of the applicant's request for resignation in lieu of elimination / Under Other Than 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 4-2b. This elimination is based on misconduct and moral or professional dereliction. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 August 2012 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 11 July 2007 / Indefinite b. Age at Appointment: / Education: 27 / Bachelor's Degree c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: W-2 / 920A0 Property Accounting Technician / 18 years, 8 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 4 June 1998 - 9 February 2003 / NIF ARNG, 10 February 2003 - 9 February 2004 / HD USAR, 10 February 2004 - 11 July 2005 / NIF AGR, 12 July 2005 - 15 July 2007 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Iraq (10 February 2003 - 23 April 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: MSM-2, ARCOM-3, AAM-6, VUA-2, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, OSR, AFRMMD, MOVSM, CAB / The applicant's AMHRR reflects award of the ASR, however, the award is not reflected on the DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: 1 October 2007 - 2 October 2010 / Best Qualified 3 October 2010 - 2 October 2011 / Fully Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CID Report of Investigation, dated 17 October 2011, reflects the US Army Reserve (USAR) Provost Marshal (PM), notified HQ USACIDC the applicant (Title 10 AGR member), committed larceny and fraud. While conducting an end of year (fiscal) closeout of financial accounts, the G4, 79th SSC (USAR), discovered unauthorized purchases were being made with the GSA Advantage System, utilizing the Department of Defense Activity Address Code (DODAAC) of the 311th ESC (USAR). After an audit of the accounts, it was discovered the applicant (while assigned to current unit) made over $400k in fraudulent purchases of high-end engineer equipment, utilizing the DODAAC number of the former unit (311th ESC). Due to a lack of oversight, the 311th ESC, did not know unauthorized purchases were being made against their DODAAC since January 2011. There were suspicions the applicant was making unauthorized purchases when assigned to the 311th ESC. When the applicant became aware the former unit was investigating the questionable purchases, the applicant contacted the former unit and denied making them. The applicant later contacted the former unit and offered to pay the money back and indicated winning over 1.5 million dollars in the lottery. Further checks revealed the unauthorized purchases were shipped to a warehouse near the applicant's home of record. Additionally, the phone number on the purchase orders linked the applicant. On 27 September 2011, the applicant requested to be released from Active Duty; however, USAR HQ requested the applicant remained on Activity Duty until CID investigation was complete. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a VA Rating decision which reflects 100 percent service-connected for PTSD, effective 9 April 2021. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Two DD Forms 214; DD Form 293; Three DA Forms 67-9. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides 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), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides 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, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities' last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification 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. (2) 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. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board), sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember's date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10 United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 600-8-24, Officer Transfers and Discharges, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers. (1) Paragraph 1-23, provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 1-23a, states an officer will normally receive an honorable characterization of service when the quality of the officer's service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty, or the final revocation of a security clearance under DODI 5200.02 and AR 380-67 for reasons that do not involve acts of misconduct for an officer. (3) Paragraph 1-23b, states an officer will normally receive a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service when the officer's military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A separation under general (under honorable conditions) normally appropriate when an officer: Submits an unqualified resignation; Separated based on misconduct; discharged for physical disability resulting from intentional misconduct or neglect; and, for final revocation of a security clearance. (4) Paragraph 1-23c, states a discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service. A discharge certificate will not be issued. An officer will normally receive an under other than honorable conditions when he or she: Resigns for the good of the Service; is dropped from the rolls (DFR) of the Army in accordance with paragraph 5-9; (3) is involuntarily separated due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or for the final revocation of a security clearance under DODI 5200.02 and AR 380-67 as a result of an act or acts of misconduct, including misconduct for which punishment was imposed; and, is discharged following conviction by civilian authorities. (5) Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty. (6) Paragraph 4-2b, prescribes for the elimination of an officer for misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or in the interests of national security. (7) Paragraph 4-20a (previously 4-24a), states an officer identified for elimination may, at any time during or prior to the final action in the elimination case elect one of the following options: Submit a resignation in lieu of elimination; request a discharge in lieu of elimination; and, Apply for retirement in lieu of elimination if otherwise eligible. e. 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. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends having PTSD; and the mind, body, and soul was not right when making the mistake which led to the discharge. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The applicant did submit evidence to support the contention the discharge resulted from a medical condition. The applicant provided a VA Rating decision, dated 9 April 2021, which reflects 100 percent service-connected for PTSD. The AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found the following potentially-mitigating diagnosis: PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant is service-connected for PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor opined, after applying liberal consideration, that there are no mitigating Behavioral Health conditions because the applicant's involvement in the sale and receipt of stolen U.S. Government property worth approximately $10 million is not part of the natural history or sequelae of applicant's PTSD, or other behavioral health conditions, and, as such, is not mitigated under Liberal Consideration. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. The Board, after applying liberal consideration, concurred with the Board's Medical Advisor, that applicant's PTSD did not outweigh the unmitigated wrongful sale and receipt of stolen U.S. Government property worth approximately $10 million that was the basis for applicant's separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends having PTSD. The ADRB is not bound by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decisions. There is no law or regulation which requires that an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the Board determination that there was a condition or experience that existed during the applicant's time in service. The Board must also articulate the nexus between that condition or experience and the basis for separation. Then, the Board must determine that the condition or experience outweighed the basis for separation. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former service member is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the ARBA when determining a member's discharge characterization. In this case, the Board liberally considered this contention, but determined that the applicant's PTSD did not outweigh the unmitigated wrongful misconduct for the receipt and sale of approximately $10 million in stolen U.S. Government property. (2) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board determined the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of the applicant's 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. By wrongfully receiving and selling approximately $10 million in stolen U.S. Government property, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant's contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant's characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration, the applicant's PTSD did not outweigh the unmitigated offenses of wrongful receipt and sale of approximately $10 million in stolen U.S. Government property, and the discharge was both proper and equitable. 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. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, and the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge BH - Behavioral Health CG - Company Grade Article 15 CID - Criminal Investigation Division ELS - Entry Level Status FG - Field Grade Article 15 GD - General Discharge HS - High School HD - Honorable Discharge IADT - Initial Active Duty Training MP - Military Police MST - Military Sexual Trauma N/A - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) - Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Re-entry SCM - Summary Court Martial SPCM - Special Court Martial SPD - Separation Program Designator TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA - Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210002932 1