RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
IN THE CASE OF:  
BOARD DATE: 2 April 2021 
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20200008295 
APPLICANT REQUESTS: 
• 
removal of the General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 23 June 2018, from his official military personnel file (OMPF), or 

• 
if the above request is denied place his GOMOR in his restricted folder and delete pages seven (Brigadier General B____’s memorandum, dated 30 July 2018, subject: Commander Recommendation on Filing Determination) and eight (Colonel R____’s memorandum, dated 29 July 2018, subject: Commander Recommendation for (Applicant)) 


APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 
• 
DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) 

• 
Applicant’s Memorandum to the Board, dated 17 May 2020 

• 
Distinguished Military Graduate Certificate, dated 5 May 2016 

• 
Three Awards 

• 
DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 18 January 2017 

• 
Report of Proceedings from Investigating Officer, dated 27 May 2018 

• 
Four commanders’ recommendations for applicant, dated 11-19 June 2018 

• 
Two Officer Evaluation Reports (OER) ending 25 June 2018 and 25 June 2019 

• 
Officer Record Brief, dated 19 July 2018 

• 
Memorandum for (Applicant), dated 23 June 2018, subject: GOMOR 

• 
Memorandum for Commander United States National Support Element ­Afghanistan, Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, dated 24 June 2018, subject: Acknowledgement of Receipt of Reprimand 

• 
Memorandum for Major General P____, Commander, U.S. National Support Element -Afghanistan, Bagram Air Field, dated 14 July 2018, subject: Response to GOMOR – (Applicant) 

• 
Chain of command GOMOR filing recommendations, dated 20-30 July 2018 

• 
Memorandum for (Applicant), dated 12 August 2018, subject: GOMOR Filing Determination (Applicant) 

. 
Memorandum for Record, dated 21 August 2018, subject: Notification of Filing Determination 



• 
Officer Evaluation Report, dated 25 June 2019 

• 
Memorandum thru the Staff Judge Advocate and Commander, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson for HRC, dated 1 August 2019, subject: Rebuttal to Notification of Elimination of (Applicant) 

• 
Memorandum thru Commanding General, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson for (Applicant), dated 3 October 2019, subject: Termination of Elimination Processing 

• 
Memorandum for President, Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB), dated 25 October 2019, subject: Appeal of the Filing of GOMOR in OMPF – (Applicant) 

• 
DASEB Record of Proceedings -AR20190013614, dated 3 December 2019 

• 
Memorandum from the Army Review Board Agency to the Human Resources Command (HRC), dated 19 December 2019, subject: Resolution of Unfavorable Information for (Applicant), Case Number AR20190013614 

• 
Bogan Sleep Consultants, LLC, Baseline Polysomnogram Report, dated 29 January 2020 

• 
Major B____ medical letter, dated 15 May 2020 


FACTS: 
1. The applicant states he was he suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI) in April 2017, which likely damaged the part of his brain generating neurotransmitter orexin. This chemical is a precursor to many of the neurotransmitters which regulate the sleep/wake cycle. He attempted to work through the symptoms, which included: anxiety, depression, insomnia, over-sleeping, inability to wake, forgetfulness, confusion, indecision, migraines, dizziness, nausea, strange dreams, dissociative states, and near constant fatigue. These are classic symptoms which accompany a TBI and idiopathic hypersomnia. He has been diagnosed with both conditions after thorough laboratory testing and sleep studies. He has also been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) stemming from events a year prior to his deployment. 
a. 
The GOMOR was issued as a result of his inability to stay awake after placing himself on a guard rotation. Not only did he have difficulty staying awake, but he was also having trouble identifying whether he was awake or asleep, which is a symptom of central sleep disorders. During the investigation he had difficulty discerning if he was awake, asleep, or some other degree of incapacitation. At one point he acknowledged that he thought he was awake, but if he was asleep, he deserved to be "crucified," however he really did not know he was asleep (this is supported in the official statement of M____, Company Executive Officer). The chain of command identified this symptom as a lack of integrity. 

b. 
When he was alone at the Bagram Air Field awaiting the decision by Major General P____, he began having symptoms of a psychotic episode. He attributes this to the combination of the worsening symptoms of PTSD, his current situation, and the fact that he was alone in Afghanistan awaiting punishment. Additionally, he had no means of self-defense, as his company had taken his assigned weapon prior to sending him to the Bagram Air Field because they believed he no longer needed it. 

c. 
He recognized that he needed help and visited the combat stress department. They immediately decided to medically evacuate him, determining that he was a high risk for suicide. He was informed that Major General P____ had decided to issue a GOMOR for his actions. 

d. 
In his rebuttal, he admitted to the behavioral health condition with which he had been struggling for a year. Apparently, this was taken by Brigadier General B____ as a simple attempt to deflect his actions onto his grief over his dead classmate, which he deemed inexcusable. Brigadier General B____’s commander recommendation, dated 30 July 2018, asserted that he appeared to "suffer from an integrity problem, as his sworn statement did not match his written presentation of matters to Major General P____." This is also alluded to in Colonel R____'s command recommendation, dated 29 July 2018. The applicant would contend that labeling a serious mental illness brought on by an extremely difficult duty a "deflection" is unduly harsh. The applicant would similarly contend that, given the diagnosis of idiopathic hypersomnia, the integrity problem that Brigadier General B____ identified could be attributed to a symptom of the disease. 

e. 
His treatment protocol includes a large amount of stimulant medication, a separate medication to actually make those stimulants have an effect, Prozac for depression and anxiety, several blood pressure medications, triptans for migraines, cognitive therapy, and psychotherapy. The efficacy of the medication protocol has helped him to acknowledge the reality of the conditions. He was referred to the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES), and would likely be medically retired in the coming months as result of the now-diagnosed conditions listed above. 

f. 
Each day, he is amazed that he was neither killed by the enemy while he was unable to stay awake on guard, nor found dead in Afghanistan by his own hand, before or after the incident at Ali Khel. More than that, he is thankful that none of his Soldiers were harmed in the unfortunate incident. Despite the GOMOR, he was ultimately retained in the Army by merit of his service before and after the incident. It is an unfortunate mar on an otherwise respectable record of military service. 

g. 
He has come to terms with the illnesses from which he suffers from and has reframed the situation in his mind. He believes that it would be unjust for his service to be permanently tainted by the shadow of this unfortunate set of circumstances. He 


suffers from invisible injuries brought on by his service in the military, wounds that will be physically and mentally debilitating for the rest of his life. Right now, there is a document permanently in his record which asserts that he lacked integrity, that he failed as a leader, a Soldier, and a moral human being, and that he committed one of the most despicable and dishonorable acts imaginable, using a fellow Soldier as a human shield. Allowing this document to remain in his records is, in his opinion, an injustice which defames his entire character due to symptoms of a disease that was later diagnosed. 
2. The applicant was awarded the following: 
. 
title of distinguished military graduate on 5 May 2016 for the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, he displayed outstanding qualities of leadership 

. 
Army Commendation Medal from 2-18 January 2018, for exceptionally meritorious achievement as the officer in charge during the 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division National Training Center (NTC) rotation 


3. 
His DA Form 1059, dated 18 January 2017, shows he graduated from the Infantry Basic Officer Leader Course on 20 January 2017. 

4. 
The report of proceedings from the investigating officer, dated 1 June 2018, states: 


a. 
Background:  On 27 May 2018, the investigating officer was nominated to conduct an administrative investigation into the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant falling asleep while responsible for security during a mission. 

b. 
Summary: The applicant fell asleep while performing security duties during a mission to Ali Khel between 22-26 May 2018. 


c. Facts: 
(1) 
Eight personnel from C Company, 2nd Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment participated in a mission to Ali Khel from 22-26 May 2018. 

(2) 
Upon arrival at Ali Khel, the element from C Company, 2nd Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment established two security positions. 

(3) 
Two "buddy teams" of two personnel rotated every 4 hours at the two battle positions. 

(4) 
During the day, one person would occupy each battle position splitting the 4 hour shift into two 2 hour shifts each. At night, two Soldiers would occupy each battle position for 4 hours. 

(5) 
The applicant and Sergeant T____ were the senior members of C Company, 2d Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment element on the mission. 

(6) 
The applicant was paired with Private Two A____ during guard shifts. 

(7) 
Soldiers were instructed not to sleep during guard shifts. 



(8) 
All eight personnel from C Company, 2nd Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment were assigned guard shifts. 

(9) 
The applicant did not sleep during the day between his guard shifts on 25 May 2018. 

(10) 
Sergeant T____ identified the applicant sleeping during the period of darkness from 25-26 May 2018. 

(11) 
Specialist G____ identified the applicant sleeping while on guard on 24 May 2018. 

(12) 
Private Two A____ identified the applicant sleeping while on guard during the periods of darkness from 23-24 May 2018 and 24-25 May 2018. 

d. 
Findings:  Based on the facts presented above, the investigating officer made the following findings: 

(1) 
Did the applicant fall asleep while responsible for security during a mission to Ali Khel on or about 26 May 2018? Based on his findings, the applicant fell asleep while on guard on more than one occasion during the mission to Ali Khel. These occasions were observed by several Soldiers at various times throughout the mission. 

(2) 
What were the circumstances of this incident? What was the nature of the mission being conducted? An eight-man element from C Company, 2nd Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment was tasked with providing security forces for a security force assistance brigade and their 310 Guardian Angels at Ali Khel. Upon arrival at Ali Khel, the C Company, 2nd Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment element established two security positions during the day and two at night in order to provide local security at the "Alamo." 

(a) 
Sergeant T____ stated that he saw the applicant sleeping during the final night of the mission (25-26 May 2018). In his sworn statement, Sergeant T____ describes finding the applicant seated, slumped forward with his helmet off. Sergeant T____ claims that he stood in front of the applicant for 10-15 seconds and snapping his fingers to get the applicant 's attention. 

(b) 
Specialist G____ stated that he saw the applicant sleeping on the "second day of the mission" (24 May 2018) at approximately 1300hrs. In his sworn statement, Specialist G____ claims to have seen the applicant with his head on the buttstock of his weapon until it slid off and he "jolted awake.” 

(c) 
Private Two A____ stated that he noticed the applicant sleeping "3-4 times" during the mission. According to his sworn statement, Private Two A____ described the applicant being seated with his eyes closed while leaning against sand bags on the "second and third nights" (23-24 May and 24-25 May 2018). Private Two A____ also describes the applicant being seated outside of the fighting position when Sergeant T____ confronted him. 

(3) 
How many hours of sleep had the applicant had in the 72 hours prior to the incident? What were the conditions during that time? The applicant and his element from C Company, 2nd Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment departed Tactical Base Gamberi the evening of 22 May 2018. He had been awake all day prior to departure. Upon arrival at Ali Khel, he and his element initiated their work-rest cycle while manning their security positions. During the evening each "buddy team" had 4 hours on and 4 hours off affording them time to sleep. The applicant was afforded the same opportunities to sleep as the rest of his element. There were no additional leader requirements between guard shifts. Cots were available for service members to sleep on inside a building. 

(4) 
Why was the applicant, as the senior leader on site, pulling security? Was he alone while pulling security? If so, why? With eight personnel and a requirement to man two separate security positions, everyone from C Company, 2nd Battalion, 

23rd Infantry Regiment was required to pull security in order to establish an equal work-rest cycle. During the day, the manning of the security positions was reduced to one Solder per position so the applicant was alone during his guard shifts during the day and partnered with Private Two A____ at night. 

(5) 
Were there any circumstances that could have affected the applicant 's ability to perform his duties or caused this incident to occur (e.g. sleep deprivation, medication, medical conditions, etc.)? Based on his findings, the applicant did not have a medical condition that would have affected his ability to perform his duties. He did admit that during his mid-day break on the final day of the mission he did not sleep so he could "reorient his sleep schedule.” 

e. 
Recommendations: Based on the investigating officer’s findings stated above, he made the following recommendations: 

(1) 
The command reviews this investigation and considers appropriate administrative or punitive action against the applicant. 

(2) 
The applicant be considered for rehabilitative transfer out of C Company, 2nd Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment. 

(3) 
All units providing security forces, implement a Sergeant of the Guard or roving element to ensure personnel in security positions are alert and informed of their duties, responsibilities, and reporting procedures. 


5. His OER covering the period 20 January 2017 through 25 June 2018 shows in: 
a. 
Part IVd1 (Character), his rater entered the comments: "[Applicant] fully supports SHARP [Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention], EO [Equal Opportunity], and EEO [Equal Employment Opportunity]. He cares greatly for his Soldiers. He demonstrated a strong desire to set the standard for his platoon.” 

b. 
Part VIc (Comments on Potential), his senior rater entered the comments, in part: "[Applicant] possesses the desire and work ethic for continued service in the Army. Through multiple field exercise, NTC rotations, and a deployment to combat, [Applicant] displays a capacity for increased levels of responsibility. Continue to develop [Applicant] in his current rank through assignments in different leadership positions.” 


6. Memorandum for the applicant from Major General P____, Commander, 
U.S. 
National Support Element -Afghanistan, dated 23 June 2019, subject: GOMOR, states: 

a. 
He was reprimanded for his unacceptable conduct of repeatedly falling asleep while on guard duty. His command placed him in a position of authority as the senior Soldier in charge on security duty on an important advisory mission. He failed his Command, his Soldiers, and his mission when he repeatedly fell asleep during his guard duty. Not only was he derelict in his duties, but his actions could have resulted in the loss of life. His conduct shows a lack of respect for the Army, his leadership, and the Soldiers whom he was entrusted to lead, teach, mentor, and protect. 

b. 
The U.S. Army reposed special trust and confidence in him when it granted him the privilege of being an officer and a leader. His judgment, moral character, and behavior should be beyond reproach. He was entrusted with the responsibility to set and model the standard for Soldiers to emulate. He failed to do so. His conduct fell far below the standard Major General P____ expected from an officer. His actions demonstrate a lack of maturity, military bearing, and professionalism. Additionally, his conduct reflects poorly upon him and the U.S. Army. His poor judgment raises serious concerns about his character and professionalism. His standing as an officer has been compromised, and Major General P____ questioned whether he should continue to lead Soldiers. 

c. 
The administrative reprimand was imposed as an administrative measure in accordance with Army Regulation 600-37 and not as punishment under the Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Major General P____ was considering filing a copy of this memorandum in his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR). The applicant was given 7 calendar days to forward any matters for consideration by Major General P____ prior to making his fling decision. 


7. 
On 24 June 2018, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the reprimand and indicated he would submit statements or documents in his own behalf. 

8. 
The applicant's memorandum to Major General P____, dated 14 July 2018, subject: Response to GOMOR – (Applicant), states he requested his GOMOR to be locally filed. His behavior at Ali Khel and his response to it set a poor example for his men and endangered their lives and his own by acting in a way that brought shame upon himself, his unit, the U.S. Army, and all the values he stands for. When the acting company commander first briefed him on the mission to provide security forces at Ali Khel, he requested additional manpower. However, he was not able to secure any additional Soldiers from the company. As a result, and in some misplaced sense of duty, he reduced himself to the position of a rifleman. He did not act like a platoon leader at Ali Khel and he did a disservice to his men and the people who had faith in him by doing so. Since his return from Ali Khel, he sought out treatment for his mental health issues, and he is well on the way to better mental health. The counseling he received to date has already begun to help reframe his perception of the event. This experience will undoubtedly make him a better leader and allow him to return close to his baseline after a year of being far away from it. 

9. 
On 20 and 26 July 2018 his company and battalion recommended his GOMOR be filed in the unit’s local file. 

10. 
On 29 and 30 July 2018 his brigade commander and commanding general recommended his GOMOR be permanently filed in his AMHRR. 

11. 
On 12 August 2018, after carefully considering the GOMOR, the circumstances surrounding the misconduct, all rebuttal matters submitted, and the recommendations from the chain of command, the GOMOR-imposing authority directed permanently filing the GOMOR in the applicant's AMHRR with all enclosures. 

12. 
On 21 August 2018, the applicant acknowledged receipt of his GOMOR filing determination. 

13. 
He was awarded an Army Commendation Medal from 13 September 2017 – 30 May 2019, for exceptionally meritorious service while serving as a platoon leader. 

14. 
His OER covering the period 26 June 2018 through 25 June 2019 shows in: 


a. 
Part IVd1 (Character), his rater entered the comments: "[Applicant] is of sound character; he adheres to the Army values and fully supports all of the Army programs involving EO and SHARP.” 

b. 
Part VIc (Comments on Potential), his senior rater entered the comments, in part: "[Applicant] is a talented young officer with a desire to excel. [Applicant] is able to plan and execute operations with little oversight or supervision required. [Applicant] will excel 


as a Company Executive Officer, continuing to develop towards Captain.” 
15. 
Memorandum thru the Staff Judge Advocate and Commander, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson for HRC, dated 1 August 2019, subject: Rebuttal to Notification of Elimination of (Applicant), states the applicant requested to be retained in the U.S. Army. 

16. 
Memorandum thru Commanding General, U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Jackson, Fort Jackson for (Applicant), dated 3 October 2019, subject: Termination of Elimination Processing, states after careful consideration, Major General C____ decided to terminate elimination processing in the applicant’s case. Future selection boards would continue to see the derogatory information in his AMHRR upon which this action was initiated. Accordingly, Department of the Army selection boards will have the discretion to recommend a show cause be initiated again in the future. Major General C____ recommended that the applicant take action through the DASEB. 

17. 
Memorandum for President, DASEB, dated 25 October 2019, subject: Appeal of the Filing of GOMOR in OMPF – (Applicant), states during the investigation, he did not fully disclose the truth to the investigator. He was given the opportunity to submit a rebuttal, which due to mental health issues he wrote while being medically evacuated from theater. Since the imposition of the GOMOR he has continued to serve faithfully. On 26 June 2019, he was informed that the Army had initiated elimination due to the GOMOR. He appealed the elimination and was ultimately retained by the Army. 

18. 
The DASEB record of proceedings (AR20190013614), dated 3 December 2019, determined the evidence presented did not provide substantial evidence that the document in question had served its intended purpose and that its transfer would be in the best interest of the Army. The DASEB determined by unanimous vote that the overall merits of his case did not warrant transfer of the contested document. 

19. 
Memorandum from the Army Review Board Agency to HRC, dated 19 December 2019, subject: Resolution of Unfavorable Information for (Applicant), Case Number AR20190013614, states after careful consideration, the DASEB voted to deny transfer of the GOMOR, dated 23 June 2018. 

20. 
Major B____’s medical letter, dated 15 May 2020, states the applicant is a patient under his care for diagnoses of PTSD, chronic, and for idiopathic hypersomnia. The idiopathic hypersomnia is quite severe and results in the service member being unable to reliably stay awake. It is believed that he has suffered from idiopathic hypersomnia for at least the last 3 years as this is when his symptoms of hypersomnolence started. The limitations from his illness fails retention standards under Army Regulation 40-501 (Medical Services Standards of Medical Fitness), paragraph 3-32c, hypersomnia of central origin. The patient is on two separate wake-promoting stimulant medications, and without these medications, he is unable to function meaningfully and suffers from irresistible sleep attacks. Patient should be non-deployable and should not carry an individually assigned weapon as this would pose undue risk to the him and his peers. 

21. 
On 15 September 2020, he retired by reason of combat related disability and was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserves Control Group (Retired). He completed 4 years, 3 months, and 29 days of net active service during this period. His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded or authorized the: 

. 
Army Commendation Medal (3rd Award) 

. 
Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award) 

. 
National Defense Service Medal 

. 
Global War on Terrorism Service Medal 

. 
Afghanistan Campaign Medal with campaign star 

. 
Army Service Ribbon 

. 
Army Reserve Component Overseas Training Ribbon 

. 
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Medal 

. 
Parachute Badge 




MEDICAL REVIEW: 
1. The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor was asked to review this 
case. Documentation reviewed included the applicant’s ABCMR application and 
accompanying documentation, the military electronic medical record (AHLTA), the VA electronic medical record (JLV), the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB), the Medical Electronic Data Care History and Readiness Tracking (MEDCHART) application, and the Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS).  The ARBA Medical Advisor made the following findings and recommendations: 
a. The applicant is applying to the ABCMR requesting removal of a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) from his official military personnel file. If this is not possible, he requests that it be moved to the restricted section of his personnel file. He states: I was later diagnosed with Idiopathic Hypersomnia (IH). Likely, I developed IH as a result of a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) I received while in Airborne School in 2017.  IH causes sleep attacks, inability to stay awake, disrupted sleep/insomnia, inability to fully awaken, and in some cases difficulty distinguishing between 
being awake and asleep.  Diagnosis was confirmed by sleep study results.” 
b. The Record of Proceedings and DASEB denial detail the applicant’s service and the circumstances of the case. The applicant’s DD 214 shows he entered the regular 
Army on 17 May 2015 and was placed on the temporary disability retirement list (TDRL) on 15 September 2020 under the authority provided in chapter 4 of AR 635-40, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation (19 January 2017).   
c. 
This request was denied by the DASEB on 3 December 2019 (AR20190013614).  Rather than repeat their findings here, the board is referred to the record of proceedings for that case. This review will concentrate on the new medical evidence submitted by the applicant. 

d. 
A Commander’s Inquiry concluded the applicant fell asleep on multiple occasions during on a four-day security watch while a platoon leader and the OIC of this mission in Afghanistan. On 23 June 2018, the applicant received a GOMOR these actions: 


“You are hereby reprimanded for your unacceptable conduct of repeatedly falling 
asleep while on guard duty.  Your Command placed you in a position of authority as the senior Soldier in charge on security duty on an important advisory mission. You failed your Command, your Soldiers, and your mission when you repeatedly fell asleep during your guard duty.  Not only were you derelict in your duties, but your actions could have resulted in the loss of life.  Your conduct shows a lack of respect for the Army, your leadership, and the Soldiers whom you were entrusted to lead, teach, mentor, and protect.” 
e. 
The applicant presented to the local emergency room 2 days later with thoughts of suicide and was subsequently medically evacuated from theater. 

f. 
Upon return, he submitted his rebuttal to the GOMOR 14 July 2018, which stated in part. 


“I was nodding off; that fact in itself is unacceptable, regardless of the duration of the lapses or any explanation.  By giving the appearance of falling asleep, I empowered my men to do the same, set a poor example and lost the trust of the 
men I was leading.” 
g. Following his review of the applicant’s rebuttal, BG J.B. recommended the GOMOR be permanently filed in his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) stating: 1LT {Applicant} appears to suffer from an integrity problem, as his sworn statement did not match his written presentation of matters to MG P. Additionally, it appears that he attempted to deflect the cause of his poor leadership onto the 1/1 SFAB team in his sworn statement. 
h. MG P. directed the letter be placed in the applicant’s AMHRR. 
i. Action to eliminate the officer was undertaken the following year.  The applicant stated in his 1 August 2019 rebuttal to the notification of elimination: 
During the investigation, I attempted to draw a distinction while being interviewed by the Investigating Officer between falling asleep and "nodding" on guard, displaying poor integrity and immaturity as an Officer and as a leader. Additionally, I attempted to state that the Security Force Assistance Brigade (SFAB) unit that was with us on site's complacency somehow made me think that it was OK to take my helmet off on guard.  That is an obvious deflection -I knew better.  Not only did I know better, however, but as the OIC of the security for the compound and having identified an issue with the security posture, I should have 
had the courage to correct any deficiencies with SFAB immediately.” 
j. Review of the applicant’s AHLTA records show he was first seen for a mental concern on 25 June 2018, when he had presented to the local ER with suicidal thoughts two days after receiving the GOMOR.  Following his medical evacuation from theater, he continued to be seen by behavioral health specialist for treatment of adjustment disorder until 5 September 2018. 
k. He was next seen by behavioral health on 28 May 2019 for issues surrounding 
the anniversary of a fellow Soldier’s death.  Military mental health treatment continued 
from this time until his placement on the TDRL for PTSD. 
l. 
The first AHLTA encounter for sleep issues is dated 19 February 2020.  He had undergone a sleep study the preceding month and it was suggestive of idiopathic hypersomnia.  Idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) is a chronic neurologic disorder marked by an insatiable need to sleep that is not eased by a full night's slumber. People with idiopathic hypersomnia sleep normal or long amounts of time each night but still feel excessively sleepy during the day. While he did improve on medication, the condition, along with his PTSD, was determined by a physical evaluation board to be an unfitting disability for which he was placed on the TDRL. 

m. 
It is the opinion of the ARBA Medical Advisor that the applicant’s idiopathic hypersomnia can be considered by the board to be partially mitigating. While it may mitigate his episodes of sleeping on duty while the OIC of a security watch detail, it 


cannot mitigate his apparent lack of integrity. Therefore, it is the opinion of the ARBA medical advisor that his request be denied. 
BOARD DISCUSSION: 
After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board considered the applicant's statement, record of service, circumstances of the GOMOR and his transfer to the TDRL. The Board considered the review and conclusions of the medical advising official. The Board recognized that the applicant has a diagnosed sleep disorder, the symptoms of which can be considered partially mitigating toward his misconduct. However, the applicant acknowledged that he knew the potential impact of those symptoms yet chose to place himself on guard duty. In making that decision, he endangered lives of other Soldiers as well as himself. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined there was no basis warranting transfer or removal of the applicant’s GOMOR from his record. 
BOARD VOTE: 
Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 
: : : GRANT FULL RELIEF 
: : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 
: : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING 
:XXX :XXX :XXX DENY APPLICATION 
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 
X 
CHAIRPERSON 
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. 
REFERENCES: 
1. 
Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR considers individual applications that are properly brought before it. The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing (sometimes referred to as an evidentiary hearing or an administrative hearing) or request additional evidence or opinions. Applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. 

2. 
Army Regulation 40-501 (Medical Services Standards of Medical Fitness), effective 27 July 2019, governs medical fitness standards for enlistment, induction, and appointment, including officer procurement programs; medical fitness standards for retention and separation, including retirement; medical standards and policies for aviation; and medical fitness standards for diving, Special Forces, airborne, Ranger, free fall parachute training and duty, small unmanned aircraft system operators, and certain enlisted military occupational specialties and officer assignments such as civil affairs, psychological operations, and Army maritime sea duty. Paragraph 3-32c, states hypersomnia of central origin is a category of sleep disorders characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness which is not from disturbed sleep or a misaligned circadian rhythm. Diagnosis requires an evaluation by a provider with expertise in sleep medicine. 

3. 
 Army Regulation 600-8-104 (AMHRR Records Management), effective 4 April 2014, prescribes policies governing the AMHRR Management Program. The AMHRR includes, but is not limited to, the official military personnel file, finance-related documents, and non-service related documents deemed necessary to store by the Army. Paragraph 3-6 provides that once a document is properly filed in the AMHRR, the document will not be removed from the record unless directed by the ABCMR or other authorized agency. 

4. 
 Army Regulation 600-37 (Unfavorable Information), effective 10 May 2018, sets forth policies and procedures to ensure the best interests of both the Army and Soldiers are served by authorizing unfavorable information to be placed in, transferred within, or removed from an individual's AMHRR. 


a.  Paragraph 1-5 states the objectives of this regulation are to apply fair and just standards to all Soldiers; protect the rights of individual Soldiers and, at the same time, permit the Army to consider all available relevant information when choosing Soldiers for positions of significant trust and authority or positions or appointments screened for suitability in accordance with Secretary of the Army Memorandum, dated 12 February 2014. Prevent adverse personnel actions based on unsubstantiated derogatory information, irrelevant or untimely information, or mistaken identity. Provide a means of correcting injustices if they occur. Ensure that Soldiers of poor moral character are not continued in the Army or selected for positions of significant trust and authority or positions or appointments screened for suitability. 
b.  Chapter 3 (Unfavorable Information in AMHRR) states personnel management decisions will be based on the following: 
. 
review of a Soldier's AMHRR when selecting Soldiers for positions of significant trust and authority or positions or appointments screened for suitability 

. 
knowledge and best judgment of the commander, board (based on direction given in the applicable memorandum of instruction), or other responsible authority 

. 
both favorable and unfavorable information regarding the Soldier will be considered 


c.  Paragraph 3-5 states: 
(1) 
Filing of non-punitive administrative memoranda of reprimand, admonition, and/or censure in an officer's local file is restricted to: 

(a) 
the recipient's immediate commander or a higher level commander in the chain of command (if such commander is senior in grade or date of rank to the recipient); 

(b) 
the designated rater, intermediate rater, or senior rater, under the officer evaluation reporting system (Army Regulation 623-3); and 

(c) 
the general officer (to include one frocked to the rank of brigadier general) who is senior to the recipient, or an officer who exercises general court-martial jurisdiction over the recipient. 

(2) 
Statements furnished by the recipient following referral will be attached to the memorandum for filing in the local file. 

(3) 
A memorandum, regardless of the issuing authority, may be filed in the AMHRR, and managed by the U.S. Army HRC or the proper State Adjutant General (for Army National Guard personnel) upon the order of a GO (to include one frocked to the rank of brigadier general). The GO directing filing must exercise general court-martial convening authority over the recipient.  Memoranda filed in the AMHRR will be filed in the performance folder. Directions for filing in the AMHRR will be contained in an endorsement or addendum to the memorandum. 

(4) 
A memorandum containing unfavorable information to be included in a Soldier's AMHRR will be forwarded for inclusion in the performance portion of the AMHRR, only after considering the circumstances and alternative non-punitive measures. Minor behavior infractions or developmental mistakes will not normally be recorded in a Soldier's AMHRR. Once placed in the AMHRR; however, such information will be permanently filed, unless removed through the appeal process (see chapter 7). 

d. Paragraph 7-2d (Burden of Proof and Level of Evidence Required) states: 

(1) 
The recipient has the burden of proof to show, by clear and convincing evidence, to support assertion that the document is either untrue or unjust, in whole or in part. 

(2) 
Evidence submitted in support of the appeal may include, but is not limited to: an official investigation showing the initial investigation was untrue or unjust; decisions made by an authority above the imposing authority overturning the basis for the adverse documents; notarized witness statements; historical records; official documents; and/or legal opinions. 

(3) 
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Review Boards) is the final decision authority for removal of unfavorable information from the AMHRR. This authority will not be further delegated. 


//NOTHING FOLLOWS//