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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, applicant is requesting an upgrade of discharge based on undiagnosed PTSD in conjunction with depression and anxiety, which caused applicant to make uncharacteristic decisions. At the time of applicant's discharge, the applicant was dealing with an overwhelming amount of financial and domestic stress in conjunction with untreated traumatic disorders, which led applicant to make some very poor choices. While the applicant accepts full responsibility for those choices, applicant also believes the feelings of depression, anxiety and impending doom fostered a breeding ground for those choices. Since the applicant's discharge, applicant has been able to turn applicant's life around by seeking treatment for applicant's mental conditions. The applicant is flourishing with the help of counseling and medication. The applicant was able to gain custody of all three of applicant's children and be a great role model for them by providing purpose, direction, and motivation through positive examples. The applicant maintained a clean record. In hindsight, the applicant deeply regrets applicant's actions and has learned how to better manage situations through treatment. In a records review conducted on 16 February 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 6 December 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date Charges Preferred (DD Form 458, Charge Sheet): On 5 November 2007, the applicant was charged with: Charge I: Violation of Article 80, UCMJ: The Specification: On 20 June 2006, attempt to steal a Heine Beta 200 Streak Retinoscope 3.5v with Twist Lock, a Heine Beta 200 Ophthalmoscope 3.5v with Twist Lock, and a Heine Beta Wall Plug-in Handle with Twist Lock, military property of a value greater than $500, the property of the U.S. Army. Charge II: Violation of Article 107, UCMJ: Specification 1: On 27 August 2007, with intent to deceive, make a false official to Dr. K., statement, to wit: "The company shipped it on the 18th, my sister shipped it on the 25th from VA," referring to optometry equipment the applicant agreed to purchase for Dr. W., which statement was totally false. Specification 2: On 20 June 2007, with intent to deceive, sign an official memorandum, to wit: Optometry Supplies, which memorandum was totally false. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 7 November 2007 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 21 November 2007 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 August 2004 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / HS Graduate / 125 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 68W10 P3, Health Care Specialist / 8 years, 6 months, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 2 June 1999 - 27 June 2002 / HD RA, 28 June 2002 - 19 August 2004 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Kuwait (10 December 2000 - 15 April 2001) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3, AAM-3, ASUA, AGCM-2, NDSM, AFEM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR g. Performance Ratings: June 2004 - May 2005 / Fully Capable June 2005 - February 2006 / Fully Capable 1 March 2006 - 28 February 2007 / Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Memorandum for Record, dated 20 October 2007, reflects an Investigating Officer (IO) was appointed to conduct a Commander's Inquiry in regards to the applicant, suspected of Frauds against the United States for ordering Optometry equipment through the military supply system and selling the equipment for personal financial gain. The IO believed from the evidence and sworn statements, the applicant ordered the equipment for Dr. W. through Veatch with the intentions of helping Dr. W., but when the applicant did not follow up with Veatch regarding an alternate address to ship the equipment to, the applicant's intent changed. The equipment was never ordered nor shipped through Veatch as stated by the applicant. The applicant kept the money from Dr. W; ordered the same equipment through Medical Logistics; and intended to give the equipment to Dr. W. The applicant returned the money to Dr. W. only when Major W. found out about the ophthalmic equipment was ordered from supply. The IO recommended the case be referred to the Clinic Commander. Charge Sheet as described at the preceding paragraph 3c. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided VA Rating Decision, dated 29 October 2018, reflecting the applicant claimed sleep apnea as secondary to PTSD. The VA found the evidence continued to show the condition was not related to the already service connected condition of PTSD. The pages provided indicates the rated percentage for the applicant's various medical conditions, with the exception of applicant's service connected PTSD (page 4 of the document is missing). The applicant provided VA letter, dated 5 November 2018, reflecting the applicant was rated a combined total of 100 percent disability for applicant's various medical conditions, effective 11 July 2018. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Applicant's Response to the Case Management Division, Army Review Boards Agency; VA Letter; VA rating decision. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states turning applicant's life around by seeking treatment for applicant's mental conditions and is flourishing with the help of counseling and medication. The applicant gained custody of all three of applicant's children and became a great role model for them by providing purpose, direction, and motivation through positive examples. The applicant maintained a clean record and learned how to better manage situations through treatment. 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 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. (5) Paragraph 10-8a stipulates a discharge under other than honorable conditions normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record during the current enlistment. (See chap 3, sec II.) (6) Paragraph 10b stipulates Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper. 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 "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. f. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program, governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waivable and nonwaivable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes. RE-4 applies to a person separated from last period of service with a nonwaivable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation, or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. 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 evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel, voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and indicated an understanding an under other than honorable conditions discharge could be received, and the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. The general (under honorable conditions) discharge received by the applicant was appropriate under the regulatory guidance. The applicant contends suffering from undiagnosed PTSD, depression, and anxiety, which affected applicant's behavior and ultimately led to applicant's discharge and applicant was diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. The applicant provided VA documents indicating applicant was determined service connected disabled for PTSD. The applicant's AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant contends turning applicant's life around by seeking treatment for mental conditions; gained custody and became a role model for applicant's children; and maintained a clean record. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. No law or regulation provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life after leaving the service. 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. 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 DoD and VA medical records and found the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder and PTSD, which, in the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor could potentially mitigate attempting to steal military property, making a false official statement with intent to deceive, and signing an official memorandum with intent to deceive, which led to separation from the Army. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. AHLTA contains an in-service BH diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder. The applicant is 100% service connected, 70% for PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor arrived at this finding after reviewing the available information and in accordance with the 3 Sep 2014 Hagel Liberal Consideration Memorandum and the 25 Aug 2017 Clarifying Guidance, that although the applicant has a BH diagnosis of PTSD it is not a mitigating factor in applicant's misconduct of attempting to steal military property of a value greater than $500, making a false official statement with intent to deceive, and, signing an official memorandum with intent to deceive, all are not part of the sequela of symptoms associated with PTSD. The applicant's misconduct is a series of willful and conscious decisions/behaviors that have no nexus with PTSD symptoms. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the ADRB's application of liberal consideration, the Board concurred with the Board's Medical Advisor that the applicant's attempting to steal military property, making a false official statement with intent to deceive, and signing an official memorandum with intent to deceive outweighed the applicant's PTSD and Adjustment Disorder for the reasons listed in (3) above. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends suffering from undiagnosed PTSD, depression, and anxiety, which affected applicant's behavior and ultimately led to applicant's discharge and applicant was diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, however, the applicant's attempting to steal military property, making a false official statement with intent to deceive, and signing an official memorandum with intent to deceive outweighed the applicant's PTSD and other BH conditions. The board determined that the discharge was proper and equitable. (2) The applicant contends turning applicant's life around by seeking treatment for mental conditions; gained custody and became a role model for applicant's children; and maintained a clean record. The ADRB 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 must 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. In this case, the Board determined that the weight of the evidence presented to the Board supported no change to the applicant's discharge. 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 of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant's PTSD and Anxiety Disorder did not excuse or mitigate the offenses of fraud. 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 AR20210003132 1