1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 5 February 2020 b. Date Received: 10 February 2020 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, a six-year contract was completed honorably. While in IRR, the applicant was informed about needing an extension and didn't know whether to reenlist or leave the military. During this time, the applicant went through a financial and mental hardship and requested to end military service. The applicant was not aware this would cause the actual discharge to change from honorable to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant believes an honorable discharge is warranted. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 11 January 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's major depressive disorder (MDD) mitigated the applicant's misconduct of Unsatisfactory Participation and failure to report to battle assembly. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service Honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 135-178, Paragraph 11-1a. 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 / AR 135- 178, Chapter 12 / NA / NA / General (under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 14 June 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 March 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 31 October 2017, the applicant's commander mailed him the notification via certified mail, with a suspense of 30 days to acknowledge the notice and rights. Commander's Report, dated 22 February 2018, reflects the applicant was notified of the proposed separation via certified mail on 31 October 2017. The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant failed to attend at least 12 of 48 Unit Training Assemblies (Battle Assemblies). The applicant was declared an unsatisfactory participant with no future potential in the U.S. Army Reserve, when on or about 5 August 2017, the applicant, without any cogent or emergency reasons, received the ninth unexcused absence. The applicant's decision to miss nine (9) unit training assemblies constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers. The objective of the USAR program is to sustain a well-disciplined, mission capable force ready for mobilization. As deploy-ability is dependent upon Soldiers satisfactorily participating with their units of assignment, the applicant's failure to do so is incompatible with service in the U.S. Army Reserve training assemblies, which constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant failed to respond to the notification of separation, thereby waiving the right to counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant failed to respond to the notification of separation, thereby waiving the right to an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 May 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 February 2017 / 7 months The applicant extended the most recent enlistment by a period of 7 months on 21 February 2017, giving the applicant a new ETS from the IRR, of 25 September 2017. The applicant later extended enlistment by a period of 1 year on 5 August 2017, giving the applicant a new ETS of 25 September 2018. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources / 9 years, 3 months, 2 weeks, 5 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 26 February 2009 - 19 July 2009 / NA IADT, 20 July 2009 - 17 December 2009 / HD USARCG, (AT) 18 December 2009 - 28 June 2015 / NA (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Commander's Report as described in previous paragraph 3c. Three Developmental Counseling Forms, for missing Battle Assembly/Annual Training. Letter of Instructions - Unexcused Absence, dated 15 August 2017, reflects the applicant was absent from a scheduled unit training assembly (UTA) or a multiple unit training assembly (MUTA) for the following periods: 5 August 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) 5 August 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) 6 August 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) 6 August 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) Affidavit of Service by Mail, reflects the Letter of Instructions, dated 15 August 2017, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 16 August 2017. Letter of Instructions - Unexcused Absence, dated 18 September 2017, reflects the applicant was absent from a scheduled unit training assembly (UTA) or a multiple unit training assembly (MUTA) for the following periods: 9 September 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) 9 September 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) 10 September 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) 10 September 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) Affidavit of Service by Mail, reflects the Letter of Instructions, dated 18 September 2017, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 20 September 2017. Letter of Instructions - Unexcused Absence, dated 26 October 2017, reflects the applicant was absent from a scheduled unit training assembly (UTA) or a multiple unit training assembly (MUTA) for the following periods: 21 October 2017 (MUTA 2) 22 October 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) 22 October 2017 (MUTA 1 and 2) Affidavit of Service by Mail, reflects the Letter of Instructions, dated 26 October 2017, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 26 October 2017. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; copies of military personnel record. 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 prescribes 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 of the United States (ARNGUS) and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. Readiness is promoted by maintaining high standards of conduct and performance. (1) Paragraph 2-9a prescribes an honorable characterization 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. (2) Paragraph 2-9b, prescribes, if a Soldier's service has been honest and faithful, it is appropriate to characterize that service as general (under honorable conditions). Characterization of service as general (under honorable conditions) is warranted when significant negative aspects of the Soldier's conduct or performance of duty outweigh positive aspects of the Soldier's military record. (3) Chapter 3-23 (Section IV), states, if separation proceedings under this chapter have been initiated against a Soldier confined by civil authorities, the case may be processed in the absence of the respondent. (4) Chapter 12, provides in pertinent part, that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant. 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 as prescribed by AR 135-91, chapter 4; Attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence. (5) Paragraph 12-3, prescribes the service of Soldiers separated under this chapter will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as determined under chapter 2, section III, unless an uncharacterized description of service is warranted under paragraph 2-11. 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 honorable. The applicant's (AMHRR) record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends six years of service were good and honorable. The Board will consider the service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends with the decision to end military career, the applicant was unaware the discharge would change from honorable to general (under honorable conditions). The record shows the unit commander attempted to contact the applicant on several occasions and mailed the notification letter to separate and the discharge recommendation to the applicant's last known address via certified mail. Army Regulation 135-178 stipulates a Soldier is subject to discharge for unsatisfactory participation. The determination that a Soldier is unqualified for further military service for unsatisfactory participation is prescribed in Chapter 4, AR 135-91: attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence resulting 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 the Soldier failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. 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: Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that VA service connection of the applicant's diagnosis of MDD indicates that it occurred during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant's service-connected condition, MDD, partially mitigates the misconduct of failure to report to battle assembly. Review of medical records contains no documentation of any BH- related symptoms, experiences or diagnoses. While the VA medical record indicates the applicant is 70% service-connected for MDD, the VA records provide no clinical information or detail regarding this diagnosis. The lack of clinical content and detail notwithstanding, per Liberal Consideration, applicant's service connected BH diagnosis alone is sufficient for the board's consideration given the association between MDD and avoidant behaviors. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the applicant's MDD outweighed the unsatisfactory participation basis for separation due to the known connection between MDD and avoidance behaviors. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends six years of service were good and honorable. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's MDD outweighing the applicant's missed battle assemblies misconduct basis for separation. (2) The applicant contends not knowing the decision to end military career would change from honorable to general (under honorable conditions). The Board found evidence of numerous attempts by command to notify and work with the applicant, contradicting this contention. Nevertheless, the Board voted that relief was warranted based on other circumstances as outlined above. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's major depressive disorder (MDD) mitigated the applicant's misconduct of Unsatisfactory Participation and failure to report to battle assembly. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's MDD mitigating the applicant's misconduct of Unsatisfactory Participation due to failure to report to battle assembly. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) As there were no Reasons/SPD Codes/RE-codes listed on the applicant's discharge paperwork, due to being in the Army Reserves, no upgrade actions are required for these items. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Authority to: AR 135-178, Paragraph 11-1a 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 AR20200003689 1