1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 17 September 2019 b. Date Received: 23 September 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the current discharge is preventing the ability to obtain VA mortgage. The applicant is unsure why the discharge was not honorable because there were never any disciplinary actions taken against the applicant. In a records review conducted on 12 August 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: Conscientious Objection / NGR 600- 200, Paragraph 8-35I(9) / NA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 31 October 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (A Memorandum, subject: Recommendation for discharge [Applicant], dated 4 October 2008, reflects the commander requested the discharge of the applicant based on evaluation of the applicant’s conscientious objector packet and personal counseling. The applicant’s religious beliefs directly affected the applicant’s performance and unit morale. A Memorandum, subject: Request for Discharge for Conscientious objector, dated 4 October 2008, reflects the commander requested the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178, Chapter 15, Paragraph 15-1. A Memorandum, subject: Command Referral for a Mental Evaluation of SPC Sharp, dated 14 September 2008 reflects the commanders request for the required Mental Health Evaluation for conscientious objector separations. The request includes reference to pending legal action for AWOL from 2-3 August 2008. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Conscientious Objection (3) Recommended Characterization: A DA Form 4187, dated 4 October 2008, reflects the commander recommended a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service and a RE code 4. (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 October 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of the case by an administrative separation board. The memorandum referred to a separation under Army Regulation 135-178, Chapter 12 (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 January 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 July 2002 / 8 years (ARNG) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 14M10, MANPADS Crewmember / 6 years, 3 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 8 October 2002 – 26 February 2003 / UNC (Concurrent Service) (IADT) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR, NDSM, ARCAM-2 g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: A Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 3 October 2008, reflects the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings and was mentally responsible. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 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 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 15 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army’s best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary’s approved designee as announced in updated memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. e. National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200, establishes standards, policies, and procedures for the management of the Army National Guard (ARNG) and the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) enlisted Soldiers in the functional areas of: Classification and Reclassification; Personnel Management; Assignment and Transfer, including interstate transfer; Special Duty Assignment Pay; Enlisted Separations; and Command Sergeant Major Program. Chapter 6, previously chapter 8, sets the policies, standards, and procedures for the separation of enlisted Soldiers from the ARNG/ARNGUS. Paragraph 6-35l((9), previously 8- 35I(9) Conscientious objection defers to AR 135-178, Chapter 15. Separation will be processed per Army Regulation 600-43. f. Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. Chapter 6 establishes procedures for separating Soldiers for the convenience of the Government. Chapter 15-1(l) provides that the separation authority may approve discharge under this paragraph based on Conscientious objection. The Soldier will be processed in accordance with Army Regulation 600-43. g. Army Regulation 600-43 (Conscientious Objection) establishes uniform standards for processing conscientious objector applications during mobilization. It implements conscientious objector’s policy found in DODD 1300.6. It applies to the Active Army, The Army National Guard, and the U.S. Army Reserve unless otherwise stated. Paragraph 3-4 provides an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) will be furnished. When discharged for conscientious objection a RE-4 will be issued h. 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 waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1 defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable 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 of 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’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant’s NGB Form 22 reflects the applicant was discharged under the provisions of NGR 600-200, Chapter 8-35I(9), due to Conscientious objection, with a General (under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and a RE code of “4.” The applicant states the current discharge is preventing the ability to obtain VA mortgage. Eligibility for veteran's benefits does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The applicant reports to be unsure why the discharge was not honorable because there were no disciplinary actions taken. The AMHRR indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's NGB Form 22 block 26, reentry code as “3.” Soldiers processed for Conscientious objection will be assigned a RE Code of “4.” 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? No. The Board’s Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed DoD and VA medical records and found no mitigating BH to be diagnoses on the applicant. The applicant provided no documents or testimony of a condition or experience, that, when applying liberal consideration, could have excused or mitigated a discharge. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? N/A (3) Does the condition or experience excuse or mitigate the discharge? N/A (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant contends, the current discharge is preventing the ability to obtain VA mortgage. The Board determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare, or VA loans, do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. c. The Board determined the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, considering 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 had no BH conditions which mitigated the misconduct of AWOL and Conscientious Objection to warrant relief. The board determined the applicant’s AWOL prevented the applicant service from being sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable characterization. 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, 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 AR20190012645 1