1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 August 2020 b. Date Received: 5 August 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, joining the U.S. Army Reserve in May 2001. The applicant was very excited to become a part of the military because of the applicant's background of growing up and being raised by a grandparent on the east side of Detroit, Michigan. There were not many role models in the neighborhood or the family. The applicant was surrounded by drugs, alcohol, and violence. The applicant attended one of the best high schools in Detroit. When the applicant joined the Army Reserves, the applicant was in the 20s, a young person confused about so many things in life. The applicant went to basic training in Fort Jackson and realized the applicant should have joined full-time because it was the best thing the applicant could have done. The applicant did not want to return home. By the time the applicant graduated basic training, the applicant found out the applicant was pregnant but had no idea until the end of basic training. The applicant had taken a pregnancy test before leaving the Military Entrance Processing Stations (MEPS) and the result was negative. After discovering the applicant was expecting, the applicant continued to train for five weeks and went home around the middle of August. The applicant struggled with determining the best decision for the applicant, being pregnant with the first child. The applicant began Army Reserve training two days out of every month and began making mistakes because there was much happening in the applicant's life. The applicant did not have a very good support system when it came to the applicant's child. The applicant began missing drills, which led to the discharge. The applicant had another child in November 2006. It really caused the applicant concern because the applicant had little support, including from the husband at the time. The applicant is remorseful the applicant lacked in fulfilling the duties as a Soldier, but the applicant has learned a lesson and has not given up on anything else in life. The applicant was unaware the applicant could request a code change to honorable and should have reached out to someone but was very embarrassed. As the applicant looks back at the mistakes the applicant has made and not doing what the applicant should have done as a young person, the applicant now sees the benefits of doing the best job the applicant can do. The applicant has three children, ages 2, 13, and an 18-year-old, who has joined the Marines. When the applicant sees the children, it disappointing having another than honorable discharge and is the applicant's biggest regret. The applicant has a master's degree in Business Administration. The applicant does not have a very sad story, but the applicant is disappointed it has happened to the applicant. The applicant is just a Soldier who would like to regain recognition for the time the applicant served in the Army because the applicant made mistakes. The applicant did not have a reliable babysitter or support system, which caused the applicant to miss drills. The applicant accepts responsibility and desires to have a second chance. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable to use the benefits allocated to the applicant and the family. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 09 August 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, post-service accomplishments, and the circumstances surrounding the applicant's situation at that time (pregnancy, childcare). Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to General, Under Honorable Conditions. 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: 7 December 2006 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: 13 March 2001 / 8 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 71L10, Administrative Specialist / 5 years, 8 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: IADT, 2 May 2001 - 18 August 2001 / UNC (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant provided Orders 06-341- 00007, dated 7 December 2006, reflecting the applicant was discharged on 7 December 2006, from the U.S. Army Reserve. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 149; self-authored statement; separation orders; reduction orders; Detail Point Listing for Previous Retirement Year; Chronological Statement of Retirement Points; and Master of Business Administration Degree. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is the parent of three children, with one child enlisted in the U.S. Marines, and has attained a Master of Business Administration Degree. 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. (3) Chapter 13 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army's best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary's approved designee as announced in updated memorandums. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. 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 provided a properly constituted discharge order: Orders 06-341-00007, dated 7 December 2006. 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 youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of the discharge. The AMHRR shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. The applicant contends family issues affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. The applicant did not provide any evidence to show the applicant sought assistance for the family issues. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends being the parent of three children, with one child enlisted in the U.S. Marines, and attaining a Master of Business Administration Degree. 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? No. The Board's Medical Advisor reviewed DoD and VA medical records and found no mitigating diagnoses. 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 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 requests an upgrade to honorable. The Board considered this contention and determined that a change to the applicant's current characterization of service is warranted because of the applicant's length of service, post-service accomplishments, and the circumstances surrounding the applicant's situation at that time (pregnancy, childcare). These factors outweighed the applicant's basis for separation - not showing up for required duty/drill. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to General (Under Honorable Conditions). Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of the discharge. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant met military entrance standards, to include age. However, length of service and post-service accomplishments outweighed the applicant's basis for separation. (3) The applicant contends family issues affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. The Board considered this contention non-persuasive during its deliberations due to an upgrade being granted based off the applicant's length of service and post-service accomplishments. (4) The applicant contends being the parent of three children, with one child in the U.S. Marines and attaining a Master of Business Administration Degree. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based off the applicant's length of service and post-service accomplishments. c. The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the applicant's situation at that time, length of service, and post- service accomplishments. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records to present additional evidence/information if desired. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support any contention(s). d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board carefully considered the: applicant's request, supporting documents, evidentiary record, medical review, and published Department of Defense guidance for liberal consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board unanimously voted (vote of 5-0) that the discharge was inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the applicant's situation at the time (pregnancy, childcare). The Board did consider the applicant's length of service, post-service accomplishments, and time since discharge but found no other mitigation. The Board unanimously voted (vote of 5-0) to upgrade the discharge to General (Under Honorable Conditions). An upgrade to Honorable was not accepted as the applicant could have addressed the situation differently instead of not showing up for required duty/drill. (2) As there were no reasons/SPD Codes/RE-codes listed on the applicant's discharge paperwork, (USAR Soldier), no upgrade actions are required for these items. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New Separation Order: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. 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 AR20210007346 1