1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 17 December 2020 b. Date Received: 19 January 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: 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) and a change to the narrative reason and RE code. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, when the applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserves, life was changed forever. After training, the applicant returned home and began to drill once a month. During the second year as a Soldier, the applicant missed two drills but did not provide an adequate reason why to command. At the next drill, the applicant was advised of being recommended for separation due to missing the two drills. The applicant was told if able to maintain perfect attendance at drill and good performance (PT test scores, rifle marksmanship, medical readiness, etc.) they would notify command they wished to retain. The applicant states approximately a year and a half later, the applicant met with the chain of command and was advised due to perfect drill attendance and test scores a letter would be sent up the chain of command to retain applicant. A month later in May of 2014, the applicant reported to drill as usual and the first sergeant told said the letter had not reached command in time. The applicant was discharged from the Army Reserves. Six and a half years later, applicant states taken several steps to improve self, including obtaining an Associate's degree and working on Bachelors. The applicant feels the discharge is inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident. Applicant also states in 2014, was not yet mature enough to handle the responsibilities and expectations set forth by the Army, but takes full responsibility for what happened during the time spent in the Army Reserve. In a telephonic personal appearance hearing conducted on 14 February 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, prior period of honorable service, and post-service accomplishments. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to Honorable. As there is no Narrative Reason/SPD code or RE- code listed on the discharge paperwork, due to the applicant being a Reservist, there is no action required for these items at this time. Please see Section 10 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 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 29 May 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: 29 May 2014 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 April 2011 / 8 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / NIF / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 12N10, Horizontal Construction Specialist / 3 years, 1 month, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: IADT, 15 March 2012 - 18 May 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: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; one third-party letter; discharge orders; DD Form 214. 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 general (under honorable conditions) and narrative reason and RE code changed. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The AMHRR is void of the specific 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 14-142-00080, dated 22 May 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 requests a narrative reason change and an RE Code 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 and RE Codes 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. If the applicant desires to rejoin the military, local recruiters can determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility. The applicant contends discharge is inequitable because the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends obtaining employment, completed an Associates degree and is working on Bachelors and has remained physically fit and medically approved by MEPS (July 10, 2020). 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. The applicant contends leadership stated if applicant began to have perfect attendance and good performance, they would send a letter to command stating they wished to retain, but the letter did not make it in time. The AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. 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. 9. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): N/A b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): Applicant and character witness provided oral argument and statements in support of the contentions provided in written submissions and in support of previously submitted documentary evidence. c. Counsel / Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. 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 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 leadership stated if applicant began to have perfect attendance and good performance, they would send a letter to command stating they wished to retain, but the letter did not make it in time and separation proceeded. Due to the witness testimony, which was the applicant's 1SG at the time of discharge, confirming this fact and giving approval of the applicant to be retained at the time , the Board found an upgrade to HD to be warranted. (2) The applicant contends obtaining employment, completed an Associate's degree and is working on Bachelors and has remained physically fit and medically approved by MEPS. The ADRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. 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. In this case, the Board found that the applicant deserved an upgrade in part due to the post-service accomplishments. (3) The applicant contends the discharge is inequitable because the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. The Board took into account the applicant's prior period of honorable service and the isolated incident as confirmed by the applicant's chain of command and determined that relief was warranted. (4) The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of the discharge. The Board determined the applicant met all requirements of service to include age. Due to the seriousness of the misconduct including conscious, deliberate decisions the applicant made when presented with challenges, youthful discretion does not excuse the misconduct. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The Board voted after considering the contention and finding no evidence of the Command purposely acting in an arbitrary or capricious manner, rather a delay in the request to retain. c. The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service, prior period of honorable service, and post-service accomplishments. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's key witness, the 1SG at the time of discharge, confirmed the intent to retain was delayed and applicant was discharged though an upstanding young Soldier. 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. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New Separation Order: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: 2/24/2022 Presiding Officer, COL, U.S. ARMY Army Discharge Review Board Signed by: COLBERT.ROLANDA.DELRESA.1064869872 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