1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 13 February 2020 b. Date Received: 18 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 under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant believes the discharge was unjust because the applicant requested multiple times to be transferred to a reserve unit closer to home. The reserve unit was 70 miles from the applicant’s home. Most drill months, the applicant was not given housing or food. The applicant was living in a car and barely staying afloat. The applicant let the chain of command know and asked to be transferred to a unit closer to the applicant’s home address. From lack of proper housing, the applicant developed mental health problems and alcoholism. The chain of command knew of these issues and could not or would not help the applicant. Before being discharged, the applicant had been admitted to rehab and psychiatric wards. The applicant is finally well enough to submit this request for a discharge upgrade. The applicant is trying to get life back on track. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 10 February 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the accepted basis for separation – unsatisfactory participation – 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 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 January 2012 / 8 years (USAR) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / some college / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 2 years, 7 months, 1 day d. Prior Service / Characterizations: IADT, 28 February 2012 – 29 June 2012 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Orders 14-226-00003, dated 14 August 2014, which reflects the applicant was to be reduced in grade from E-3 to E-1 with an effective date of 22 July 2014, and discharged on 19 August 2014, from the United States Army Reserve. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of Assessment Summary, dated 22 January 2015, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I: Opioid Dependence, Mood D/O NOS and Axis IV: Severe emotional, family, social, and financial. The applicant provided a copy of a diagnosis. On 26 January 2015, the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I: Opioid dependence. Mood disorder – NOS and Anxiety disorder – NOS, Axis II: Borderline personality features., and Axis IV: Severe: lack of support, occupational stress. The applicant provided a Statement from Clinical Psychologist, dated 10 August 2021, which reflects the applicant has been continuously receiving outpatient mental health treatment. The applicant was diagnosed with: Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Severe Without Psychotic Features – Partial Remission, Reactive Attachment Disorder, Ambivalent Type – Partial Remission, Alcohol & Narcotic Abuse – Full Remission. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149 and medical documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is trying to get their life back on track. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD, TBI, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities’ last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. (2) Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board), sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember’s date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10 United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. The separation policies throughout the different Chapters in this regulation promote the readiness of the Army by providing an orderly means to judge the suitability of persons to serve on the basis of their conduct and their ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities. (1) Paragraph 2-7, prescribes possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general (under honorable conditions), under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. (2) Paragraph 2-8, prescribes the characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldier’s service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests an upgrade to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant’s Army Military Human Resource Record (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 14-226-00003, dated 14 August 2014. 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 requesting multiple times to be transferred to a reserve unit closer to home. The unit could not or would not help the applicant. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant’s statement, to support the contention. The applicant’s available AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends also suffering from homelessness, mental health issues and alcoholism during the time in the reserves. The applicant was admitted to rehab and psychiatric wards prior to being discharged. The applicant provided a copy of Assessment Summary, dated 22 January 2015, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I: Opioid Dependence, Mood D/O NOS and Axis IV: Severe emotional, family, social, and financial. The applicant provided a copy of a diagnosis. On 26 January 2015, the applicant was diagnosed with Axis I: Opioid dependence. Mood disorder – NOS and Anxiety disorder – NOS, Axis II: Borderline personality features., and Axis IV: Severe: lack of support, occupational stress. The applicant provided a Statement from Clinical Psychologist, dated 10 August 2021, which reflects the applicant has been continuously receiving outpatient mental health treatment. The applicant was diagnosed with: Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Severe Without Psychotic Features – Partial Remission, Reactive Attachment Disorder, Ambivalent Type – Partial Remission, Alcohol & Narcotic Abuse – Full Remission. The applicant is trying to get life back on track. 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: Major Depressive Disorder, Reactive Attachment Disorder, and Alcohol and Narcotic Abuse, In remission. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant asserts suffering from these conditions while 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, and if, the post-service psychiatric diagnoses are considered in an abundance of caution, the diagnoses do not impair an individual’s ability to make conscious choices, understanding consequences, or reach out to Command. Rather, it is more likely than not the applicant’s personality features with substance abuse contributed to the applicant’s unsatisfactory participation. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the Board’s application of liberal consideration, the Board considered the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant’s conditions outweighed the basis for applicant’s separation - Unsatisfactory performance - for the aforementioned reason. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends requesting multiple times to be transferred to a reserve unit closer to home. The unit could not or would not help the applicant. The Board liberally considered this contention, ultimately the Board determined that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that any of the applicant’s asserted medical conditions mitigated the basis for applicant’s separation; and the applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant’s statement, to support the contention. The applicant’s available AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. (2) The applicant contends also suffering from homelessness, mental health issues and alcoholism during the time in the reserves. The Board considered this contention and the applicant’s assertion of mental health issues and alcoholism; however, the Board determined based on available medical records, the applicant did not hold an in-service behavioral health diagnosis. Also, the applicant is not service connected or have VA records to support applicant’s claim. (3) The applicant is trying to get their life back on track. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this, 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 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 there were no mitigating factors for the Board to consider which might outweigh the applicant’s Unsatisfactory Participation – which is the accepted basis for separation since the discharge packet was not available or provided by the applicant. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code, and the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. ? 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL – Absent Without Leave AMHRR – Army Military Human Resource Record BCD – Bad Conduct Discharge BH – Behavioral Health CG – Company Grade Article 15 CID – Criminal Investigation Division ELS – Entry Level Status FG – Field Grade Article 15 GD – General Discharge HS – High School HD – Honorable Discharge IADT – Initial Active Duty Training MP – Military Police MST – Military Sexual Trauma N/A – Not applicable NCO – Noncommissioned Officer NIF – Not in File NOS – Not Otherwise Specified OAD – Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) – Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF – Official Military Personnel File PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE – Re-entry SCM – Summary Court Martial SPCM – Special Court Martial SPD – Separation Program Designator TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury UNC – Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC – Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA – Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20200003733 1