1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 April 2017 b. Date Received: 2 June 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an uncharacterized discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the file is incomplete and does not have a summary of why the applicant was discharged. The conduct of the unit has been found unethical and the applicant was pushed out after asking for help. The applicant has struggled working with the VA offices with no results. The applicant loved serving the country and wants a proper opportunity to serve. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate no active duty records for review. The applicant does not have any VA records. In summary, there is insufficient evidence to make a statement regarding medical mitigation. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 August 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the characterization of service being both proper and equitable. However, based on the matters surrounding the discharge and current standards, the Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is now improper. Therefore, the board directed the issue of a new DD Form 214 changing the separation authority to AR 635- 200, paragraph 5-17, the narrative reason for separation to Condition, Not a Disability, and the separation code to JFV. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Personality Disorder / AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-13 / JFX / RE-3 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 17 March 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 March 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He was diagnosed by a Licensed Psychologist as having an adjustment disorder with a lack of motivation, and lack of effective coping skills. His behavioral and attitudinal problems render him incapable of coping with the emotional stress of military training. (3) Recommended Characterization: Uncharacterized (4) Legal Consultation Date: 4 March 2005 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 March 2005 / Uncharacterized 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 21 October 2004 / 3 years, 26 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / None / 4 months, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: None g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: See paragraph 4j. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Mental Status Evaluation, dated 22 February 2005, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment Disorder with Mixed anxiety and Depressed Mood; and, Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified with Antisocial and Passive Aggressive Traits. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-13 in effect at the time, provided that a Soldier may be separated for a personality disorder, not amounting to disability, when the condition interfered with assignment to or performance of duty. The regulation requires that the condition is a deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration that interferes with the Soldier's ability to perform military duties. The regulation also directs that commanders will not take action prescribed in this Chapter in lieu of disciplinary action and requires that the disorder is so severe that the Soldier's ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired. Army policy requires the award of a fully honorable discharge in such case. Characterization of service under honorable conditions may be awarded to a Soldier who has been convicted of an offense by general court-martial or who has been convicted by more than one special court-martial in the current enlistment, period of obligated service, or any extension thereof. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided 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) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided 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; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance 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. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his uncharacterized discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant was diagnosed by competent medical authority with a Personality Disorder. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated his duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends his unit's conduct was found to be unethical. However, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to 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 (RE) codes if appropriate. 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. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 August 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the characterization of service being both proper and equitable. However, based on the matters surrounding the discharge and current standards, the Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is now improper. Therefore, the board directed the issue of a new DD Form 214 changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, the narrative reason for separation to Condition, Not a Disability, and the separation code to JFV. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: Condition, Not a Disability d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17 e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JFV / No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20170011822 1