1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 October 2016 b. Date Received: 7 November 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, understands the problem that has arisen and that as of now has the current characterization of service. The applicant understands that January 2014 was the last drill, the ETS was in March of 2014 and was told by a liaison at the unit that the applicant could RST. The applicant signed an IRR packet without a problem, waited for orders to come in, but was never notified, since there was a wrong telephone number on file and wrong address. Because of all of this, the applicant was unaware of whether the orders arrived. Again, the applicant completely understands being at fault for the absences. The applicant does want to say that while in the military, there were no flags and failed no PT Tests. The applicant was deployed and received several awards, and was completely dedicated to serving the country. The applicant went out of the way to volunteer for missions and is truly sorry about not showing up for some drills. The applicant does not feel the applicant should have received the current characterization of service because the applicant truly gave it all to the military and would like the chance to do whatever needs to be done to amend the situation so that the applicant leaves the military with an honorable discharge. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 April 2019, and by a 3-2 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: Unsatisfactory Participation / AR 135- 178 / Chapter 13 / NIF / NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 10 March 2015 c. Separation Facts: (Documents submitted by the applicant) (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 October 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Under the provisions of AR 135-178, a memorandum was sent to the applicant reference the initiating of action to vacate his suspended discharge. On 19 May 2014 the commander of the 926th Engineer Brigade directed that he applicant be separated from the Army Reserve for unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service as under other than honorable conditions. The applicant was to be reduced to E-1 and that the discharge be suspended for a period of 12 months. The basis for his proposed action was that he violated his probation for his suspended discharge. The action was suspended for 20 days to give the applicant the opportunity to exercise his rights. He was informed to complete the attached endorsement acknowledging receipt of the action and indicating his election of rights. A copy of the memorandum with the completed endorsement was to be delivered to the address shown on the endorsement within 20 days from the date of his receipt of the memorandum of notification. Any statements or documents he desired to submit in his behalf were to reach the commander within 20 calendar days after he received the memorandum, unless he request and received an extension for good cause shown. Unless an extension was granted, failure to deliver the completed endorsement within 20 calendar days of the date of his receipt of this memorandum would constitute a waiver of his right in. Evidence in the record shows that the certified mail sent to the applicant at (132 Nevada Circle, Oak Ridge, TN) was unclaimed after several attempts to deliver. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 29 January 2015 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. (The separation authority directed the vacation of suspension and that the applicant be discharged with a UOTHC discharge and that the applicant be reduced in rank to E-1). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 March 2008 / 8 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / GED / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 6 years, 11 months, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 25 March 2008 to 6 April 2008 / NA ADT, 7 April 2008 to 1 August 2008 / UNC USAR, 2 August 2008 to 15 April 2009 / NA OAD, 16 April 2009 to 27 April 2010 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (28 May 2009 to 31 March 2010) 7 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR, AFRM-M Device g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Several memorandum's submitted by the applicant reference Unexcused Absence; show the applicant was absent from scheduled unit training assemblies (UTA) or multiple unit training assemblies. Several negative counseling statements for his unexcused absences. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF; however, the applicant submitted documents from the Ridgeview Intake dated 27 February 2019, showing that he is seeking treatment as a result of what he is/was dealing with since his deployment to Iraq and PTSD. It was noted by the intake therapist that the applicant's presentation was consistent with Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder. The applicant expressed interest in therapy and assistance towards gaining employment, but preferred to hold off on medication management in light of his history of addiction. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 in lieu of DD Form 293; self-authored statement; recommendations for awards; order for several awards; DD Form 214 for prior period of service; several letters of instruction (unexcused absence); documents from separation packet to include developmental counseling statements; separation orders; and medical documents from the Ridgeview Behavioral Health Services, dated 27 February 2019. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve. Chapter 13 provides in pertinent part, that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant. AR 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills accrue during a one-year period and attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in the Soldier's refusal to comply with orders or correspondence; or a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier has failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. Discharge action may be taken when the Soldier cannot be located or is absent in the hands of civil authorities in accordance with the provisions of AR 135-91, paragraph 2-18, and Chapter 3, section IV, of AR 135-178. Army policy states possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation 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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the former Soldier's discharge from the US Army Reserve. However, evidence submitted by the applicant 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 military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline and diminished the quality of his service by him violating his probation for his suspended discharge. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. The applicant seeks relief contending that he was told by a liaison at the unit that he could RST. He signed his IRR packet without a problem, he waited for his orders to come in, but was never notified, since there was a wrong telephone number on file and wrong address. Because of all of this he was unaware of whether the orders arrived. Again, he completely understands that he is at fault for his absences. He does want to say that while he was in the military he received no flags, and failed no PT Test. He was deployed and received several awards, and was completely dedicated to serving his country. He contends he went out of his way to volunteer for missions and it truly sorry that he did not show up for some of his drills. He does not feel he should have received his current characterization of service because he truly gave his all to the military and would like the chance to do whatever he needs to do to amend the situation so that he leaves the military with an honorable discharge. 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 and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishment. However, it appears this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating at the time of discharge to warrant a characterization of honorable or general (under honorable conditions) at the time of discharge as a result of his repeated incidents of misconduct as shown by the violation of his suspended discharge. The independent post-service medical documents submitted by the applicant were noted; however, the service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service at the time of discharge. 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 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 24 April 2019, and by a 3-2 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 AR20170000876 1