1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 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, being under a doctor's care for cognitive- behavioral therapy since 2012, due to the sudden death of a parent; and for losing a job because of alleged retaliation for filing an EEO and sexual assault for other Soldiers while working as a unit administrator for the unit. The applicant requested training be rescheduled to another unit until the medical condition improved. The applicant also requested transfer to the IRR (Individual Ready Reserve) until the condition improved. The unit failed to notify the applicant of a pending separation action and instead, the applicant was contacted by a judge advocate. The unit failed to provide local legal counseling upon request in a timely manner and discharged the applicant without acknowledging the request for a personal appearance before an administrative separation board. The unit refused to pay for RSTs performed or for mandatory medical doctor appointments for an annual physical. The unit was aware of the treatment and the written requests. The applicant served over 28 years of creditable military service and 29 years of creditable service for the government. An upgrade to honorable would be due to the "Selection for Retention" under AR 135-205 during the Qualitative Retention Board in 2012; the applicant was an honor graduate of the Senior Leadership Training (ANCOC of 2011); and there is no record of any negative counseling. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 7July 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's depression and anxiety under multiple diagnoses to include panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression with anxiety and references of MST outweighing the accepted basis for separation - missing drill. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to 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: NIF / AR 135-178 / NIF / NIF / NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 15 July 2014 c. Separation Facts: The applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) is void of the case separation file. (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: 8 December 2008 / The AMHRR is void of any other enlistment contract after this date. However, the applicant provided a copy of a memorandum dated 9 October 2012, which reflects the Qualitative Retention Board had recommended the applicant as among the best qualified for continued retention in a unit of the Army Reserve. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 38 / High School Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-7 / 79V40, Retention and Transition NCO / 28 years, 5 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 18 August 1983 - 26 January 1984 / NA IADT,27 January 1984 - 9 June 1984 / HD USAR, 10 June 1984 - 1 October 1991 / NA RA, 2 October 1991 - 13 April 1993 / HD (Break in Service) USAR, 6 January 1994 - 7 December 2000 / HD USAR, 8 December 2000 - 16 April 2003 / NA AD, 17 April 2003 - 24 September 2003 / HD USAR, 25 September 2003 - 18 October 2009 AD, 19 October 2009 - 14 October 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3, AAM-6, ARCAM, NDSM-BS, AFRM-M, OSR, GWOTSM g. Performance Ratings: March 2000 - January 2001 / Among the Best October 2001 - June 2002 / Among the Best 1 May 2005 - 9 May 2008 / Fully Capable 10 May 2008 - 9 May 2009 / Fully Capable 10 May 2009 - 3 December 2009 / Among the Best 4 December 2009 - 14 October 2010 / Among the Best 15 October 2010 - 14 October 2011 / Fully Capable 15 October 2011 - 14 October 2012 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Orders 14-189-0010, dated 8 July 2014, reflect the applicant was to be discharged on 15 July 2014 from the United States Army Reserve. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Memorandum, dated 21 December 2012, reflects a diagnosis of Depression with Anxiety. Physical Profile, dated 22 January 2013, reflects a diagnosis of Depression and Anxiety. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Two DA Forms 1059; Four DD Forms 214; DD Form 293; DAV Letter; Memorandum for Record, dated 13 January 2016; Orders 14-189-00010; DA Form 3349; Memorandum For Record, dated 4 May 2012; Letter, dated 5 July 2012; Memorandum for Record, dated 21 December 2012; Letter, dated 28 August 2013; Letter, dated 28 February 2014; Two twenty-year letters; Memorandum, dated 9 October 2012; Honor Graduate Certificate; Two DA Forms1059; DA Form 2166-8; AHRC Form 249-E. 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 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 honorable. The applicant's Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR) is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army Reserve. The applicant's AMHRR does contain a properly constituted discharge order: Orders 18-122- 00034, dated 2 May 2018. The orders indicate the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-178, with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests a narrative reason change. Orders are published when service members are discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve, which indicate the effective date and characterization of the discharge. Narrative reasons usually are not included in the order. In insomuch as the applicant's discharge order does not have these elements, the ADRB has no basis for changing the discharge order. The applicant contends being under a doctor's care for cognitive-behavioral therapy since 2012, due to the sudden death of a parent; and, losing a job because of alleged retaliation for filing an EEO and sexual assault for other Soldiers while working as a unit administrator for the unit. The applicant requested training be rescheduled to another unit until medical condition improved. The applicant also requested a transfer to the IRR (Individual Ready Reserve) until condition improved. The applicant provided a Memorandum, dated 21 December 2012, reflects a diagnosis of Depression with Anxiety. A Physical Profile, dated 22 January 2013, reflects a diagnosis of Depression and Anxiety. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends the unit failed to notify the applicant of a pending separation action and failed to provide local legal counseling upon request in a timely manner. The applicant was contacted by a judge advocate and the unit discharged the applicant without acknowledging the request for a personal appearance before an administrative separation board. The unit refused to pay for RSTs performed or for mandatory medical doctor appointments for an annual physical. The unit was aware of the treatment and the written requests. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant's statement, to support the contention. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends good service. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. 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: depression and anxiety under multiple diagnoses to include panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression with anxiety. Additionally, the applicant's VA records reference history of MST, which may be sufficient evidence to establish the existence of a condition that could mitigate or excuse the discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found the evidence is compelling for noteworthy depression and anxiety at the time of service as described above and reference to MST during service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant was discharged from the reserve component, and medical records indicate that while still in RC status applicant had noteworthy anxiety and depressive symptoms to include diagnoses of depression with anxiety, panic disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder. There is also reference to MST in VA records although no such references appeared to be present during applicant's care while still in military status. The basis of separation is not located in the file and a review of the medical records ultimately does not shed conclusive light on the basis of separation although there is reference to separation due to not attending drill. Although anxiety disorders, to include panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder, may potentially mitigate what is in essence failure to report (especially in the context of possible MST). (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the applicant's depression and anxiety under multiple diagnoses to include panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression with anxiety and references of MST outweighed the accepted basis for separation - missing drill - for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant requests a narrative reason change. The Board considered this contention and determined that orders are published when service members are discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve which indicate the effective date and characterization of the discharge, and narrative reasons usually are not included in the order. Insomuch as the applicant's discharge order does not have these elements, the ADRB has no basis for changing the discharge order in the absence of a narrative reason for discharge. (2) The applicant contends being under a doctor's care for cognitive-behavioral therapy since 2012, due to the sudden death of a parent and losing a job because of alleged retaliation for filing an EEO and sexual assault for other Soldiers while working as a unit administrator for the unit. The applicant requested training be rescheduled to another unit until the medical condition improved. The applicant also requested transfer to the IRR (Individual Ready Reserve) until the condition improved. The Board considered this contention, but ultimately voted to upgrade the discharge based on the applicant's depression and anxiety under multiple diagnoses to include panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression with anxiety and references of MST outweighing the accepted basis for separation - missing drill. (3) The applicant contends the unit failed to notify the applicant of a pending separation action and failed to provide local legal counseling upon request in a timely manner. The applicant was contacted by a judge advocate and the unit discharged the applicant without acknowledging the request for a personal appearance before an administrative separation board. The unit refused to pay for RSTs performed or for mandatory medical doctor appointments for an annual physical. The unit was aware of the treatment and the written requests. The Board considered this contention, but ultimately voted to upgrade the discharge based on the applicant's depression and anxiety under multiple diagnoses to include panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression with anxiety and references of MST outweighing the accepted basis for separation. (4) The applicant contends good service. The Board considered this contention, but ultimately voted to upgrade the discharge based on the applicant's depression and anxiety under multiple diagnoses to include panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression with anxiety and references of MST outweighing the accepted basis for separation. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's depression and anxiety under multiple diagnoses to include panic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and depression with anxiety and references of MST outweighing the accepted basis for separation - missing drill. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's PTSD mitigated the applicant's misconduct of marijuana abuse and AWOL. 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 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 AR20210001919 1