1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 29 October 2019 b. Date Received: 4 November 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant’s Requests and Issues: 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). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, unauthorized absences led to the unfavorable discharge. The applicant contends before enlisting in the United States Army Reserve (USAR), there was service in the United States Marine Corps (USMC) and the applicant was suffering from undiagnosed mental health issues while serving in the USAR. The applicant’s issues interfered with his USAR service. The applicant also contends there was a request to be transferred to the IRR, instead the commander recommended the applicant be separated with a general (under honorable conditions), but the convening authority directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant does not want the discharge to negatively affect employment and there is a desire to reenter the military. The applicant is employed and actively volunteers in the community. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 5 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: NIF / AR 135-178 / NIF / NIF / NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 19 August 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant accrued nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled inactive duty training during a one-year period. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 August 2015 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 June 2012 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / NIF / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 74D, Chemical Operations Specialist / NIF d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USMCR, 20 March 2006 – 23 September 2006 / HD USMCR, 1 June 2008 – 5 July 2009 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / August 2008 – March 2009 f. Awards and Decorations: GWOTSM, ICM, Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, AFRM, NDSM, Expert Rifle Shooting Badge g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provides a VA Rating Decision, dated 10 March 2019, reflects the applicant was granted a service-connected evaluation of 70 percent for generalized anxiety disorder effective 28 March 2019. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, Kurta Memorandum, Orders 15-224-00023, dated 12 August 2015, USMC Honorable Discharge Certificate, DD Form 214-2, Request for Transfer to IRR, emails, Letters to command-3, Letter of Recommendation, VA Rating Decision, dated 10 March 2019, VA Form 21-0960P-2, Records Request, dated 21 May 2019, Letter from Department of Defense, Performance Appraisals-2, Incentive Awards Recommendation and Approval 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is employed and volunteers in the community. 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 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. (1) Chapter 13 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for unsatisfactory participation in the Ready Reserve (2) Paragraph 13-3 states the characterization of service normally will be under other than honorable conditions unless the Soldier is in an entry-level status 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 general (under honorable conditions). The AMHRR is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the applicant’s discharge from the Army Reserve. The applicant’s AMHRR does contain a properly constituted discharge order: Orders 15-224-00023, dated 12 August 2015. The orders indicate the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-178, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant contends before enlisting USAR, there was service in the USMC and the applicant was suffering from undiagnosed mental health issues while serving in the USAR. The applicant provides evidence from VA reflecting the applicant was granted a 70 percent service- connected disability rating for generalized anxiety disorder effective 28 March 2019. The applicant’s AMRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant also contends there was a request to be transferred to the IRR, instead the commander recommended the applicant be separated with a general (under honorable conditions), but the convening authority directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant does not want the discharge to negatively affect employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. The applicant has a desire to reenter the military. At the time of discharge, the applicant received an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Army Regulation 601-210, chapter 4, stipulates an under other than honorable conditions discharge constitutes a non-waivable disqualification; thus, the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. The applicant is employed and actively volunteers in the community. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. No law or regulation provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life after leaving the service. 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. 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 the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses/experiences: Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD). (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? No. The applicant's service-connected condition is only backdated to 2019, 4 years' post-separation. Accordingly, while the service connection assumes some symptoms were present in-service or symptoms post-service may have been related to service events, the applicant did not have a disorder in-service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that although the applicant may have had some symptoms in-service, applicant did not have a psychiatric disorder. This is further supported by the service-connected condition being backdated to four years' post- separation. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the Board’s application of liberal consideration, the Board concurred with the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant’s GAD outweighed the basis for applicant’s separation – Unsatisfactory Participation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends before enlisting USAR, there was service in the USMC and the applicant was suffering from undiagnosed mental health issues while serving in the USAR. The Board considered this contention and the applicant’s assertion of suffering from mental health issues; however, the Board determined that there is no evidence of mitigating diagnoses in official or medical records, and the applicant did not provide supporting documentation by a qualified medical professional to provide merit to the claim. Ultimately, the Board determined that the assertion alone did not outweigh the basis of separation due to the severity of the offenses. (2) The applicant contends there was a request to be transferred to the IRR. The Board considered this contention and determined there is insufficient evidence in the applicant’s file to support this contention. The applicant was properly and equitably discharged. c. The Board determined that 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’s GAD did not excuse or mitigate the offenses of Unsatisfactory Participation. 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 AR20190013915 1