1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 14 August 2019 b. Date Received: 7 October 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 general (under honorable conditions) or honorable conditions. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was given while not on active duty. The applicant states he had already finished one 8-year term and was in the process of starting another 8-year term. The applicant states with this discharge his rank was reduced from SPC (E- 4) to PVT (E-1). The applicant states he believes his rank should have remained the same and his discharge should have been a general (under honorable conditions) or honorable due to the fact that his actions were committed in his civilian life and his military service/active-duty deployment was honorable. The applicant further states he was not a perfect Soldier, but he followed his orders and never abandoned his post. The applicant states he kept a high physical fitness and had the desire to continue his service in the Armed Forces. In a records review conducted on 8 July 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: Acts or Patterns of Misconduct / NGR 600-200, Paragraph 6-35i (1) / NA / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 21 June 2011 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 Enlistment: 23 March 2004 / 8 years / The applicant extended the most recent enlistment by a period of 6 years on 27 March 2009, giving the applicant a new ETS of: 22 March 2016. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / HS Graduate / 104 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92G10, Food Service Operations Specialist / 7 years, 2 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: IADT, 16 June 2004 – 27 August 2004 / HD AD, 10 August 2005 – 21 June 2006 / HD AD, 1 October 2008 – 15 October 2009 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (17 November 2008 – 19 September 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, ARCAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ISM-CS, ASR, OSR, AFRMMD g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Orders 074-1008, dated 9 July 2011, reflects the applicant’s rank was reduced from SPC (E-4) to PVT (E-1) effective 21 June 2011. The reason for reduction was listed as misconduct. 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), 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 135-178 sets forth the policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. The separation policies throughout the different Chapters in this regulation promote the readiness of the Army by providing an orderly means to judge the suitability of persons to serve on the basis of their conduct and their ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities. (1) Paragraph 2-7, prescribes 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. (2) Paragraph 2-8, prescribes the characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldier’s service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization. e. National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation (AR) 135-91 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard. Chapter 6 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army National Guard. (1) Chapter 6 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army National Guard. 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 general (under honorable conditions) or honorable conditions. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. The applicant’s AMHRR does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which reflects the applicant was not available for signature. The NGB Form 22, indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of NGR 600-200, Paragraph 6-35i (1), by reason of Acts or Patterns of Misconduct under UCMJ, State Military Code or similar laws, with a characterization of service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. The applicant’s AMHRR is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events leading to the discharge from the ARNG. The applicant’s AMHRR does contain a properly constituted discharge Orders 208-700, with an effective date of 21 June 2011. The applicant contends he believes his rank should have remained the same and his discharge should have been general (under honorable conditions) or honorable conditions because the acts committed were in his civilian life and his military service was honorable. The applicants record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. The applicant contends he desires to rejoin the Military Service. Soldiers processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 601-210, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of “4.” An RE code of “4” cannot be waived, and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 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, reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found no medical diagnoses or experiences which could potentially mitigate or excuse misconduct leading to separation due to lack of information in the file. (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): (1) The applicant contends the earned rank should have remain and the discharge should have been general (under honorable conditions) or honorable conditions because the acts committed were in his civilian life and his military service was honorable. The Board determined that the applicant’s requested change to the DD Form 214 for rank retention does not fall within the purview of the ADRB. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using a DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may be obtained from a Veterans’ Service Organization. Additionally, Army values should always factor into everything Soldiers do or undertake whether on or off duty. (2) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant’s willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings. (3) The applicant contends he desires to rejoin the Military Service. The Board determined recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army’s needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes, if appropriate. c. The Board determined 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 records were void and the board could not make a sound decision. The applicant did not supply sufficient independent corroborating evidence to support contentions, and 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 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 AR20190013377 1