1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 June 2019 b. Date Received: 20 June 2019 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 and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that applicant has learned from the past to not place them self in compromising positions. The applicant is now asking due to the non-diverse, unjust and unfair board decision for the Army Review Board to change applicant's discharge to honorable and a code of RE and narrative for reason of separation. In a records review conducted on 20 April 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: NIF / AR 135-175 / NIF / NIF / NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 15 May 2019 c. Separation Facts: "DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT WITH APPLICATION" (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 June 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed to show cause for retention in the service under the provisions of AR 135-175, paragraphs 2-11f, for acts of personal misconduct and paragraph 2-11o, conduct unbecoming an officer. Specifically, for touching a female enlisted Soldier's buttocks on 26 March 2010, attempting to pursue an inappropriate relationship with another female Specialist, and make a false statement to an investigating officer regarding applicant's contact with this female Specialist. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: The memorandum dated 29 June 2016, indicated the applicant in accordance with AR 135-175, paragraph 2-16, would within 30 days of receipt of the correspondence, acknowledge receipt by submitting applicant's election of options and any related paperwork. Applicant's election of options must have been submitted through applicant's consulting counsel, who was described in paragraph 8 of this memorandum. Evidence submitted by the applicant indicates the applicant was informed that a formal board of would convene at 0800, 19 September 2016, to conduct a hearing for the applicant referred to the board by the applicant's commander, under the provision of AR 135-175, paragraph 2-11, Moral or Professional Dereliction for personal misconduct, conduct unbecoming an officer, and intentional misrepresentation of facts during an investigation. The applicant was notified that this administrative separation board would consider the separation action initiated by applicant's unit against the applicant. (5) Board of Officers: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 4 August 2002 / NIF b. Age at Appointment / Education: 29 / BA Degree c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: 0-3 / 92A, Quartermaster / d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 27 April 2000 to 22 May 2000 / NA ADT, 23 May 2000 to 13 October 2000 / UNC ARNG, 14 October 2000 to 3 August 2002 / HD Appointed 2LT / ARNG 4 August 2002 ARNG, 4 August 2002 to 13 June 2004 / NA OAD, 14 June 2004 to 13 June 2006 / HD USAR, 14 June 2006 to 18 November 2009 / NA OAD, 17 November 2009 to 29 January 2011 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait (11 January 2010 to 9 November 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, OSR, ASR, AFRM-M Device g. Performance Ratings: 26 March 2010 to 15 October 2010, Fully Qualified 16 October 2010 to 31 May 2011, Best Qualified 1 June 2011 to 31 May 2012, Best Qualified 31 May 2012 to 7 December 2012, Best Qualified 17 October 2013 to 16 October 2014, Highly Qualified 17 October 2014 to 31 May 2015, Highly Qualified 1 June 2015 to 18 March 2016, Highly Qualified 19 March 2016 to 10 September 2016, Highly Qualified 19 March 2016 to 18 March 2017, Qualified 19 March 2017 to 1 May 2018, Highly Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 29 May 2010, which indicates the applicant was reprimanded for inappropriate touching of a female Specialist, fraternization and false official statement. On 26 March 2010, the applicant touched SPC S.B. buttocks in an inappropriate manner. On several occasions applicant asked another female Specialist to spend time with applicant at the MWR building in an attempt to date her. When questioned by the investigating officer applicant denied asking the female Specialist to talk in private, which was false. Documents submitted by the applicant to the DA Suitability Evaluation Board, HQDA, requesting removal of a Letter of Reprimand from applicant's OMPF, based on the GOMOR being unjust in part because the only evidence against the applicant was based on one sworn statement. One such sworn statement was made by PV2 S.B., who received an Article 15 for make false statements. The applicant's credibility had not been considered when the Investigating Office wrote their findings and recommendations. The GOMOR was based on a clear pattern of inappropriate behavior. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; several officer evaluation report's (OER's); character letters; General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR); removal letter from HRC; appeal letter to HRC to include supporting documents; record of proceedings from the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB); separation notification memorandum; several unsigned memorandums'; and copy of discharge orders. 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. 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 and a narrative reason change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The AMHRR is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the applicant's discharge from the United States Army Reserve. The applicant AMHRR record does contain a properly constituted discharge order: Orders 19-105-00005, dated 15 April 2019. The orders indicate the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-175, with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending that applicant has learned from the past to not place them self in compromising positions. The applicant is now asking due to the non-diverse, unjust and unfair board decision for the Army Review Board to change applicant's discharge to honorable and a code of RE and narrative for reason of separation. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be applicant's responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the complete discharge packet is not available in the official record. 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, applicant submissions and third party statements, and found the applicant was diagnosed with Anxiety Disorder NOS, Depression and PTSD, which, in the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, after applying liberal consideration, could potentially mitigate a discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the applicant held in-service diagnoses of Anxiety Disorder NOS and Depression. The applicant is service connected for combat related PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor opined that the medical condition does not mitigate the basis of separation; inappropriate sexual behavior, pursuing an inappropriate relationship, and making false official statements to avoid consequences are not a natural progression or normal sequela of trauma. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant seeks relief contending that having learned from the past to not place them self in compromising positions. 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. 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 applicant's inappropriate sexual behavior, pursuing an inappropriate relationship, and making false official statements to avoid consequences are not mitigated by the applicant's PTSD, the discharge is both proper and equitable. (2) The applicant contends the discharge board was non-diverse, unjust and unfair and contends the Army Review Board should change the discharge to honorable, RE code and narrative reason of separation. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately determined there was insufficient evidence to support this contention, the discharge is proper and equitable. 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 Anxiety Disorder NOS, Depression and PTSD did not excuse or mitigate the offenses of inappropriate sexual behavior, pursuing an inappropriate relationship, and making false official statements to avoid consequences. 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, as 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 AR20190009347 1