1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 23 January 2020 b. Date Received: 27 January 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 honorable or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was based on missing duty weekends caused by being hospitalized and attending a funeral. The discharge was also based on not being able to take a physical training test because of a torn shoulder tendon. The applicant is applying for employment as a Texas Peace Officer, which requires an honorable discharge or documented separation to prove a discharge. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 16 December 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board’s decision. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unsatisfactory Participation / AR 135- 178, Chapter 12 (formerly Chapter 13) / NA / NA / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 8 April 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 21 November 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant failed to attend at least nine Army Reserve training assemblies within a one-year period and failed to provide a valid excuse for the absences. On 21 November 2013, the applicant’s commander mailed the applicant the notification via certified mail, with a suspense of 45 days to acknowledge the notice and rights. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant failed to respond to the notification of separation, thereby waiving right to counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant failed to respond to the notification of separation, thereby waiving right to an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 March 2014 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 28 September 2007 / 8-year USAR MSO (6 years in a USAR component) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / High School Graduate / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 63J10, QM & Chemical Equipment Repairer / 6 years, 6 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 28 September 2007 – 8 July 2008 / NA ADT, 9 July 2008 – 9 December 2008 / HD (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA Service School Academic Evaluation Report, dated 20 May 2011, reflects the applicant achieved the course standards for the Warrior Leader Course by satisfactorily completing all the requirements of the course from 6 to 20 May 2011. h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Affidavit of Service by Mail, reflects the Notification of Separation letter with enclosed endorsements for acknowledgement and appropriate election of rights response, dated 21 November 2013, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 21 November 2013. Letter of Instructions – Unexcused Absence, dated 26 March 2013, reflects the applicant was absent from a scheduled unit training assembly (UTA) or a multiple unit training assembly (MUTA) for the following periods: 16 March 2013 (MUTA 1 and 2) 17 March 2013 (MUTA 1 and 2) Affidavit of Service by Mail, reflects the Letter of Instructions, dated 27 March 2013, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 27 March 2013. /// Developmental Counseling Forms for unexcused absences. Letter of Instructions – Unexcused Absence, dated 5 November 2013, reflects the applicant was absent from a scheduled unit training assembly (UTA) or a multiple unit training assembly (MUTA) for the following periods, and with an accrued eight unexcused absences within a one- year period: 2 November 2013 (MUTA 1 and 2) 3 November 2013 (MUTA 1 and 2) Affidavit of Service by Mail, reflects the Letter of Instructions, dated 6 November 2013, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 6 November 2013. Letter of Instructions – Unexcused Absence, dated 21 November 2013, reflects the applicant was absent from a scheduled unit training assembly (UTA) or a multiple unit training assembly (MUTA) for the following periods, and with an accrued 12 unexcused absences within a one- year period: 16 November 2013 (MUTA 1 and 2) 17 November 2013 (MUTA 1 and 2) Affidavit of Service by Mail, reflects the Letter of Instructions, dated 21 November 2013, was mailed to the applicant via certified mail on 21 November 2013. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: As described at the preceding paragraph 4h. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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) Paragraph 2-9c, prescribes the service may be characterized as under other than honorable conditions only when discharge is for misconduct, fraudulent entry, unsatisfactory participation, or security reasons, and under other circumstances. Delete if NA (4) 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. (5) Chapter 12 (previously Chapter 13) 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. (6) 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 or general (under honorable conditions). The applicant’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) of service and the issues submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends to have missed duty weekend drills because of hospitalization and attending a funeral, and the discharge was based on not being able to take a physical training test because of an injury. The applicant’s AMHRR contains no documentation of any medical conditions or a diagnosis during the period of service and at the time of the discharge. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant’s statement, to support the contention the discharge resulted from any medical condition. The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain employment as a Peace Officer. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. The applicant contends having no separation documents to prove the discharge. The applicant’s AMHRR does contain a properly constituted discharge order: Orders 14-091-00066, dated 1 April 2014. The orders indicate the applicant was discharged on 8 April 2014, under the provisions of AR 135-178, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The applicant’s AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. 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, a voting member, 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 to have missed duty weekend drills because of hospitalization and attending a funeral, and the discharge was based on not being able to take a physical training test because of an injury. The Board considered this contention and determined the applicant did not provide supporting documentation to provide merit to the claim. The applicant missed over 12 AUTs and MUTAs within a one year period. Ultimately, the Board decided that the assertion alone did not outweigh the basis of separation due to the severity of the offenses. In this case, the Board determined the discharge was proper and equitable. (2) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain employment as a Peace Officer. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. (3) The applicant contends having no separation documents to prove the discharge. The Board considered this contention and determined the applicant did not provide supporting documentation to provide merit to the claim. Ultimately, the Board decided that the assertion alone did not outweigh the basis of separation due to the severity of the offenses. In this case, the Board determined the discharge was proper and equitable. c. The Board determined the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, considering the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant’s contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s characterization of service because, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant had no mitigating factors for the Board to consider. 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, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL – Absent Without Leave AMHRR – Army Military Human Resource Record BCD – Bad Conduct Discharge BH – Behavioral Health CG – Company Grade Article 15 CID – Criminal Investigation Division ELS – Entry Level Status FG – Field Grade Article 15 GD – General Discharge HS – High School HD – Honorable Discharge IADT – Initial Active Duty Training MP – Military Police MST – Military Sexual Trauma N/A – Not applicable NCO – Noncommissioned Officer NIF – Not in File NOS – Not Otherwise Specified OAD – Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) – Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF – Official Military Personnel File PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE – Re-entry SCM – Summary Court Martial SPCM – Special Court Martial SPD – Separation Program Designator TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury UNC – Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC – Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA – Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20200006757 1