1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 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 under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the current discharge was initiated following a centralized BZ (below the zone) review by an active Army Major board, which required the applicant to show cause for retention on active duty because of a GOMOR for domestic violence. Prior to obtaining the GOMOR, the magistrate in the governing jurisdiction dismissed the charge. Considering the extremely low and subjective criterion for initiating the GOMOR and the fact the accusations were dismissed and presented to the convening authority, the discharge was a grave injustice given the record of service. The Purple Heart and other combat commendation awards are proof the service and sacrifice were acceptable to the Army at the time. The applicant survived an IED attack in Afghanistan, the extreme operation tempo of the deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the numerous small arms engagements. The applicant was diagnosed with a severe PTSD and TBI. The physical and emotional injuries were the direct consequences of the valiant sacrifices and dedication to the country during war time and in combat. The benefits and assistance the applicant rightfully earned are prohibited by the under other than honorable conditions discharge. An additional consequence of the injustice is the significant decrease in the quality of life because of not having sufficient access to the Veterans Administration medical and psychological support forcing the applicant to battle the brokenness alone. At the time, the service and sacrifice were highly valued and recognized with awards but were quickly forgotten. Since the IED event in 2006, the applicant fought the impossibilities of maintaining relationships. The applicant, coping without the care from the Army or the VA, has degenerated into substance abuse issues. It is extremely difficult for the applicant to obtain or maintain any kind of meaningful employment because of the discharge and lack of care and access to the services earned. After being blown out of the truck by two TC-6 anti-tank mines, the applicant made a mistake by allowing to become involved in a challenging and toxic relationship. Nevertheless, the applicant accepts responsibility for the unreasonable and unhealthy actions and choices. The Army should upgrade the discharge to fulfill its obligation to a combat veteran. The applicant claims to have no memory of any resignation occurring but speculates, had the applicant not been exposed to the IED, or if immediately redeployed and received proper care, there would not have been any problems as shown by the evaluation reports up to the final report. The applicant further details the contentions in an allied self-authored statements provided with the application. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 25 May 2023, and by 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD and TBI mitigating the applicant's DUI and the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, offsetting domestic assault, failing to manage personal affairs, and obstruction. However, the remaining unmitigated misconduct, despite being offset, fell below that level of meritorious service required for an Honorable discharge. 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 determined the narrative reason/SPD code was proper and equitable and voted not to change them. The RE code is not applicable due to the applicant's service as a commissioned Officer. 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: Unacceptable Conduct / AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4-2b and 4-24a (1) / BNC / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 27 October 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 14 April 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of being identified by FY12, Major Promotion Selection Board to show cause for retention on active duty under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraphs 4-2b because of misconduct, moral, or profession dereliction and conduct unbecoming of an officer, based on the following reasons: Substantiated derogatory activity resulting in a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 9 July 2009, which was filed in the Official Military Personnel File. (3) Legal Consultation Date: 24 May 2012 (4) Board of Inquiry (BOI): On 24 May 2012, the applicant waived the right to appear before a board of officers, and voluntarily tendered a resignation in lieu of elimination proceedings. (5) GOSCA Recommendation Date / Characterization: On 26 July 2012, the GOSCA recommended approval of the applicant's request for resignation in lieu of elimination. / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (6) DA Ad Hoc Review Board: The AD Hoc review board considered the applicant's request for resignation in lieu of elimination in accordance with AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4. (7) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 3 October 2012 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 19 February 2004 / NIF b. Age at Appointment: / Education: 29 / Master's Degree c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-3 / 13A Field Artillery, General / 17 years, 1 month, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 14 September 1995 - 22 March 1999 / HD RA, 23 March 1999 - 22 March 2001 / HD RA, 23 March 2001 - 18 February 2004 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Japan, SWA / Afghanistan (9 March 2006 - 23 November 2006); Iraq (15 May 2008 - 5 January 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ICM-2CS, BSM-2, ARCOM-3, PH, AAM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM- BSS, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, HSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-3, NATOMDL, CAB / The applicant's AMHRR reflects an additional award of an ARCOM, however, the ARCOM-4 award is not reflected on the DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: 12 July 2004 - 7 March 2010 / Best Qualified 8 March 2010 - 7 March 2011 / Fully Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Iowa District Court Order on Initial Appearance, dated 11 April 2009, reflects the applicant entering a plea of not guilty to the charges of: "Domestic Abuse Assault" and "Obstruction." General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 9 July 2009, reflects on 10 April 2009, the applicant assaulted the spouse by pulling the hair while in a physical altercation and failed to properly manage personal affairs, and the Iowa police also found the applicant obstructed emergency communications in attempting to prevent the spouse from calling the police. Iowa District Court Motion to Dismiss and Order reflects on 24 August 2009, the Judge of Third Judicial District ordered to dismiss the case against the applicant because of insufficient evidence to convict the applicant of the charges. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 3 May 2011, reflects the applicant was operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. On 13 April 2011, after being stopped for passing in a no passing zone, the officer noted a strong smell of alcohol and after failing a field sobriety test, the applicant was apprehended and transported to a police department where the applicant refused to take a breath sample. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Health Record, dated 12 April 2011, the examiner noted treating the applicant's emotional dependency, irritability, impulsivity, and depression would improve the functioning in the tested domains obtained from a neuropsychological screening battery, and completing a personality inventory may be useful in determining the extent of distress while assessing the emotional and perceptual functioning. Memorandum, dated 16 May 2011, rendered by a Staff Psychologist, reflects a neuropsychological evaluation performed reflects the applicant having suffered from TBI and the test results were consistent with someone making quick decisions under pressure in a manner which was out of character for the person. VA decision letter, dated 30 January 2014, reflects VA granted the applicant 50 percent service- connection for PTSD with cognitive disorder (also claimed as anxiety and depression) and 40 percent service-connection for TBI, both effective 28 October 2012. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; two self-authored statements; DASA ALARACT; discharge orders; psychologist memorandum; Health Records; (Iowa) civilian court motion to dismiss and order; (Oklahoma) civilian court order of dismissal; (Texas) civilian court motion to dismiss; VA decision letter; three OERs; and an additional self-authored statement. 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. Army Regulation 600-8-24, Officer Transfers and Discharges, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers. (1) Paragraph 1-23 provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 1-23a, states an officer will normally receive an honorable characterization of service when the quality of the officer's service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty, or the final revocation of a security clearance under DODI 5200.02 and AR 380-67 for reasons that do not involve acts of misconduct for an officer. (3) Paragraph 1-23b, states an officer will normally receive a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service when the officer's military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A separation under general (under honorable conditions) normally appropriate when an officer: Submits an unqualified resignation; Separated based on misconduct; discharged for physical disability resulting from intentional misconduct or neglect; and, for final revocation of a security clearance. (4) Paragraph 1-23c, states a discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service. A discharge certificate will not be issued. An officer will normally receive an under other than honorable conditions when he or she: Resigns for the good of the Service; is dropped from the rolls (DFR) of the Army in accordance with paragraph 5-9; (3) is involuntarily separated due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or for the final revocation of a security clearance under DODI 5200.02 and AR 380-67 as a result of an act or acts of misconduct, including misconduct for which punishment was imposed; and, is discharged following conviction by civilian authorities. (5) Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty. (6) Paragraph 4-2b, prescribes for the elimination of an officer for misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or in the interests of national security. (7) Paragraph 4-20a (previously 4-24a), states an officer identified for elimination may, at any time during or prior to the final action in the elimination case elect one of the following options: (1) Submit a resignation in lieu of elimination; (2) request a discharge in lieu of elimination; and (3) Apply for retirement in lieu of elimination if otherwise eligible. e. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "BNC" as the appropriate code to assign commissioned officers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 4-2b, Unacceptable Conduct; and 4-24a (1), Resignation in Lieu of Elimination. 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 contends the Under Other Than Honorable conditions discharge was a severe injustice in consideration of the applicant's service record and because the charges leading to the GOMOR for domestic violence were dismissed. The applicant's AMHRR indicate the reason for the separation was based on "[s]ubstantiated derogatory activity" resulting in a GOMOR. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends the Purple Heart and other combat commendation awards are proof the service and sacrifice were acceptable to the Army at the time. The applicant contends being diagnosed with a severe PTSD and TBI, and the physical and emotional injuries were the direct consequences of the honorable sacrifices and service to the country during war time and in combat. The applicant provided several medical documents indicating a diagnosis of PTSD, TBI, and depression. The Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service-connection for the medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty. The available medical evidence in the AMHRR is void of any indication the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during the discharge processing, warranting separation processing through medical channels. The applicant contends another consequence of the injustice is the significant decrease in the quality of life caused by not having sufficient access to the Veterans Administration medical and psychological support forcing the applicant to battle the brokenness alone. Eligibility for veterans' benefits does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The applicant contends being unable to obtain or maintain any kind of meaningful employment because of the discharge and having lack of care and access to the services earned. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. 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: Adjustment Disorder, TBI, PTSD, Depression, and Anxiety. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found evidence of multiple BH conditions to include in service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, TBI, PTSD, and Depression. Applicant is also service connected for PTSD and TBI. While the applicant has been diagnosed with Anxiety by the VA, the applicant's Anxiety has not been service-connected. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partial. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that applicant's PTSD and TBI mitigate the applicant's DUI given the nexus between PTSD, TBI, and self-medicating with substances. However, the applicant's BH conditions do not mitigate domestic assault or obstructing emergency communications, as there is no natural sequela between the misconduct and an Adjustment Disorder, TBI, PTSD, or Depression. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, to include the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the applicant's PTSD and TBI mitigated the applicant's medically mitigated DUI; however, the applicant's Adjustment Disorder, TBI, PTSD, and Depression did not mitigate or excuse the remaining medical unmitigated basis of separation misconduct - domestic assault, failure to manage personal affairs, and obstruction. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the under other than honorable conditions discharge was a severe injustice considering the record of service, and because the charges leading to the GOMOR for domestic violence were dismissed. The Board considered this contention and voted to upgrade the characterization of service based on the applicant's PTSD and TBI mitigating the applicant's DUI and the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service. However, the applicant's offenses of domestic assault, failure to manage personal affairs, and obstruction fell below that level of meritorious service required for an Honorable discharge. (2) The applicant contends the Purple Heart and other combat commendation awards are proof the service and sacrifice were acceptable to the Army at the time. The Board considered the applicant's Purple Heart and other combat commendation awards during board proceedings along with the totality of the applicant's service record and determined the contention had merit warranting an upgrade in the discharge characterization. However, the applicant's offenses of domestic assault, failure to manage personal affairs, and obstruction fell below that level of meritorious service required for an Honorable discharge. (3) The applicant contends being diagnosed with a severe PTSD and TBI, and the physical and emotional injuries were the direct consequences of the honorable sacrifices and service to the country during wartime and in combat. The Board considered this contention and voted to upgrade the characterization of service based on the applicant's PTSD and TBI mitigating the applicant's DUI and the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service. However, the applicant's offenses of domestic assault, failure to manage personal affairs, and obstruction fell below that level of meritorious service required for an Honorable discharge. (4) The applicant contends another consequence of the injustice is the significant decrease in the quality of life caused by not having sufficient access to the Veterans Administration medical and psychological support forcing the applicant to battle the brokenness alone. The Board considered this contention and determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. (5) The applicant contends being unable to obtain or maintain any kind of meaningful employment because of the discharge and having lack of care and access to the services earned. The Board considered this contention but does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. c. The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's PTSD and TBI mitigating the applicant's DUI and the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service. However, the applicant's offenses of domestic assault, failure to manage personal affairs, and obstruction fell below that level of meritorious service required for an Honorable discharge. 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 determined the narrative reason/SPD code was proper and equitable and voted not to change them. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's PTSD and TBI mitigating the applicant's DUI and the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. However, the applicant's offenses of domestic assault, failure to manage personal affairs, and obstruction fell below that level of meritorious service required for an Honorable discharge. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code is not applicable due to the applicant's service as a commissioned Officer. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions 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 AR20210002233 1