1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 29 May 2019 b. Date Received: 5 June 2019 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, his discharges did not meet the criteria if full evidence inclusion, due process, and equal protection under the law. His discharges lacked completeness and an accurate review of his entire personnel and medical records. He should have been properly boarded out by a medical evaluation board (MEB)/physical evaluation board (PEB) in order to ascertain his fitness for service due to his injuries and medical conditions. In a records review conducted on 20 October 2021, 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: NIF / AR 135-175 / NIF / NIF / NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 5 February 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 29 December 2009 / Indefinite b. Age at Appointment / Education: 24 / Master's Degree c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-2 / 70B, Health Service Administration / NIF d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAF / 25 November 1997 - 31 March 2009 / HD RA / 29 August 2010 - 2 November 2010 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: 29 December 2009 - 28 December 2010 / Fully Qualified 29 December 2010 - 28 December 2011 / Do Not Promote 29 December 2011 - 20 May 2010 / Do Not Promote h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: On 29 May 2014, Orders 14-149-00036, dated 29 May 2014, reflects the applicant was discharged effective 28 June 2014, for failure to complete BOLC within 36 months. However, on 2 December 2014, the discharge order was revoked. On 10 December 2015, the applicant was informed action was initiated to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-175, Separation of Officers, paragraph 2-11, Moral or Professional Dereliction. The action was initiated because the applicant had accrued nine or more absences from scheduled inactive duty training during a one-year period. (Provided by applicant) On 9 February 2017, after reviewing the 10 December 2015, separation packet pertaining to the applicant, it was determined by the separation authority that a board of inquiry (BOI) recommended the applicant be separated with an under other than honorable characterization of service. However, the Staff Judge Advocate determined the BOI was not made of the proper composition. The separation authority directed the BOI recommendations be set aside and the case be referred to an entirely new BOI. The new BOI proceedings are not available for review. (Provided by applicant) i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Separation documents from 2014 and 2015, medical documents, various documents from his AMHRR, college transcripts, 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), dated 25 September 2019, 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 135-175, Separation of Officers, provides policy, criteria, and procedures for the separation of officers of the Army National Guard of the United States and the U.S. Army Reserve, except for officers serving on active duty or active duty for training exceeding 90 days. (1) Paragraph 2-1 prescribes the criteria and procedures governing the involuntary separation of Reserve officers of the Army when their retention is not in the best interest of the service. Section II states the retention of officers substandard in performance of duty or conduct, deficient in character, or otherwise unsuited for military service cannot be justified in time of peace or war. The same standards of efficiency and conduct apply to all officers, regardless of component. (2) Paragraph 2-10, prescribes that unless successfully rebutted, authorizes involuntary separation of an officer due to substandard performance of duty. Officers discharged under this provision will be furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate. (3) Paragraph 2-11, prescribes that unless successfully rebutted, authorizes involuntary separation of an officer due to moral or professional dereliction. Officers discharged under this provision will be furnished an honorable or general discharge certificate, or other than honorable conditions discharge. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The AMHRR is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the applicant's discharge from the Army Reserve. The applicant AMHRR record does contain a properly constituted discharge order: Orders D-01-801046, dated 10 January 2018. The orders indicate the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-175, with a characterization of service of Under Other Honorable Conditions. The applicant's contention about his discharges lacking a complete accurate review of his entire personnel and medical records and his contention that he should have been properly boarded out by a MEB/PEB, were carefully considered. The record indicates the applicant was involuntarily separated from the Army Reserve. 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 by the military which, in the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, could potentially mitigate the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? No. Despite the application of liberal consideration, the Board's Medical Advisor determined after review of all available medical records, that only the VA medical records listed the Adjustment Disorder which could mitigate the applicant's Failure to report to duty, and that disorder only existed post service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor concluded that the applicant's BH diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder was made after he left active duty, and therefore, it does not fall under the purview of the Liberal Consideration guidance. Therefore, the Board's Medical Advisor opined there is no medical mitigation related to applicant's basis for separation. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the ADRB's application of liberal consideration, the Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that there is insufficient evidence of any condition or experience during applicant's military service to outweigh applicant's unsatisfactory participation that was the basis for separation. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. Although the applicant's records were carefully reviewed, the Board could not find sufficient evidence to support an upgrade to applicant's characterization of service. The Board, including its Medical Advisor, could not find sufficient evidence that there was a condition or experience that outweighed the basis for separation. Nor the could the Board find sufficient evidence to support an upgrade based on any impropriety or inequity. (2) The applicant contends that his discharge lacked a complete and accurate review of his entire personnel and medical records. The Board could not find any evidence to challenge the conclusion that the separation action 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. (3) The applicant contends that he should have been properly boarded out by a MEB/PEB. While the Board's Medical Advisor reviewed all available records about the applicant's medical history during military service and during VA medical care and could not find any evidence of a medical condition or experience that would support a change to applicant's basis for separation, the Board does not have the authority to determine whether or not the applicant should have been boarded out by a MEB/PEB. 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 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 Adjustment Disorder did not mitigate the offense of failure to report to duty as the basis for his separation. 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 AR20190007092 1