1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 December 2019 b. Date Received: 31 December 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 further requests to be placed in the Individual Ready Reserve and restoration of rank to sergeant/E-5. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was improper and inequitable. The applicant was discharged for failing to participate in unit training assemblies. The applicant contends there was a request to be placed in the Inactive Army National Guard based on new employment. The applicant was told if there was no longer a desire to be in the ARNG, the applicant should turn in the TA-50 and stop coming to drill. The applicant was instructed not to attend weekend drills and the unit stopped communicating. The applicant received certified letters pertaining to the missed drills. The applicant followed orders and was penalized. The applicant desires to reenlist. The applicant had to file a congressional complaint about the unit failing to allow the applicant back into the Officer Candidate School after an overseas employment. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 2 December 2022, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable and too harsh based on the applicant's proven request to be moved to IRR due to new job circumstances. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. The Board's recommendation was forwarded to the Chief, National Guard Bureau, Georgia Military Department, to the Adjutant General, State of Georgia, under the provisions of 10 USC § 1553, for final approval. 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: Unsatisfactory Participation / NGR 600-200, Paragraph 6-35j / NA / RE-3 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 11 December 2018 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 missed nine or more excused absences from scheduled drill periods during a 12- month period. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 December 2018 / Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 17 June 2013 / 8 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 30 / 4 years college / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B10, Infantryman / 7 years, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: NIF e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: None g. Performance Ratings: 18 June 2015 - 17 June 2016 / Most Qualified 17 June 2016 - 16 June 2017 / Most Qualified 17 June 2018 - 17 October 2018 / Not Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The record contains evidence showing the unit commander attempted to contact the applicant on several occasions and mailed the discharge packet to the last known address via certified mail. A Request for Inspector General (IG) records pertaining to the applicant failed to locate any records pertaining to the applicant. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, DA Form 1559 (Inspector General Action Request)-2, Job Offer Letter from the U.S. Department of Justice, Email, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Recruitment Incentive Service Agreement, UA Letters, Orders 352-144, dated 18 December 2018 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. 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 Reclassification; Personnel Management; Assignment and Transfer, including interstate transfer; Special Duty Assignment Pay; Enlisted Separations; and Command Sergeant Major Program. Chapter 6 sets the policies, standards, and procedures for the separation of enlisted Soldiers from the ARNG/ARNGUS. Paragraph 6-35j defers to AR 135- 178, chapter 13, Unsatisfactory Participation. e. 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. It 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 memorandums. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. (2) Paragraph 13-1a (1), prescribes a Soldier is subject to discharge for unsatisfactory participation when it is determined that the Soldier is unqualified for further military service because the Soldier is an unsatisfactory participant. (3) Paragraph 13-3 states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general (under honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge may be granted. 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 applicant further requests to be placed in the Individual Ready Reserve and restoration of rank to sergeant/E-5. The applicant contends the discharge was improper and inequitable because the applicant contends there was a request to be placed in the Inactive Army National Guard (IARNG) based on new employment. The applicant's AMHRR is void of an official request to be placed in the IANG. The applicant desires to reenlist. 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 had to file a congressional complaint about the unit failing to allow the applicant back into the Officer Candidate School after an overseas employment. A Request for IG records pertaining to the applicant failed to locate any records pertaining to the applicant. The applicant contends to being told if there was no longer a desire to be in the ARNG, the applicant should turn in the TA-50 and stop coming to drill and the applicant was instructed not to attend weekend drills and the unit stopped communicating. The record shows the unit commander attempted to contact the applicant on several occasions and mailed the discharge packet to the last known address via certified mail. Army Regulation 135-178, in pertinent part, stipulates that a Soldier is subject to discharge for unsatisfactory participation when it is determined the Soldier is unqualified for further military service because the Soldier is an unsatisfactory participant as prescribed in Chapter 4, AR 135-91 and attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in the Soldier's refusal to comply with such orders or correspondence; or a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. The applicant's requests to be placed in the Individual Ready Reserve and restoration of rank to sergeant/E-5 does not fall within this board's purview. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149 regarding these issues. 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 DoD and VA medical records and found no mitigating BH 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 actually 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 discharge was improper and unequitable because the applicant contends there was a request to be placed in the Inactive Army National Guard based on new employment. The Board considered this contention and determined that it holds partial merit, in that the applicant clearly requested the contended action, thus the discharge was too harsh and warranted partial relief. However, the Board also notes that with seven years' service, the applicant should have known to wait until the request was approved as not showing up to drill is not an acceptable course of action, pending paperwork approval. (2) The applicant contends to being told if there was no longer a desire to be in the ARNG, the applicant should turn in the TA-50 and stop coming to drill and the applicant was instructed not to attend weekend drills and the unit stopped communicating. The Board considered this contention and determined that the undertones of the communication were not positive, and it is obvious the unit was not going to favorably discharge the applicant. However, since the applicant did show initiative in attempting to get placed in the IRR, just not following the request to completion, partial relief was warranted. (3) The applicant contends they had to file a congressional complaint about the unit failing to allow the applicant back into the Officer Candidate School after an overseas employment. The Board could not determine is this contention holds merit, as the applicant did not provide any background information on the request. (4) The applicant requests to be placed in the Individual Ready Reserve and restoration of rank to sergeant/E-5. The Board determined that the applicant's requested changes do not fall within the purview of this Board. 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 c. The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable and too harsh based on the applicant's proven request to be moved to IRR due to new job circumstances. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. The Board's recommendation was forwarded to the Chief, National Guard Bureau, Georgia Military Department, to the Adjutant General, State of Georgia, under the provisions of 10 USC § 1553, for final approval. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions because the applicant proved their attempt to be placed in IRR prior to not showing up to drill based on new job circumstances; however, only partial relief was recommended as the applicant's 7 years of service should have demonstrated to the applicant that skipping drills without approval was not an acceptable course of action. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. This recommendation was forwarded to the NGB for approval. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable because the applicant failed to attend drills. (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 NGB Form 22a: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason: 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 AR20200002456 1