1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 July 2019 b. Date Received: 2 August 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is uncharacterized. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he was encouraged by his doctor to claim a pre-existing mental illness instead of leaving under Don't Ask Don't Tell (DADT). He approached his Drill Sergeant in October of 2007 and told him that he was upset about his boyfriend leaving him (he is a gay male) and was considering briefly considering suicide. This was a brief feeling but he was brought to a base psychologist. After a short test, he was brought to a mental health facility in Tucson, AZ. When he was brought back to Fort Huachuca he was encouraged to accept a mental health based discharge based on a pre-existing condition instead of being discharged under DADT. The applicant believes he should have his discharge upgraded to an honorable discharge (formerly DADT) because he was encouraged to accept a medical general discharge because it would be worse for him to take a DADT discharge in 2007. Had he not been discharge and been permitted to be open about his sadness regarding his separation from his boyfriend he would have been given counseling and been returned to duty where he would have served his country honorably and been discharged honorably. In a records review conducted on 2 February 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 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: Failed Medical / Physical Procurement Standards / AR 635-200 / Chapter 5-11 / JFW / RE-3 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 6 December 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) convened: NIF (2) EPSBD Findings: NIF (3) Date Applicant Reviewed and Concurred with the Findings, and Requested Discharge without Delay: NIF (4) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 July 2007 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / 13 years / 126 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / None / 4 months, 6 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 19 November 2007, indicates the applicant was seen in BHS, following his return from Palo Verde Hospital where he underwent a psychiatric hospitalization of 13 days for treatment of depression and suicidal ideation. While hospitalized he was diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder, Recurrent, Severe, and was place on antidepressant and antianxiety medications. It was noted that the applicant had provided a history of significant mental health problems prior to his enlistment, including depression with a suicide attempt in the previous year and psychiatric treatment in his early teens. A recommendation for separation under Chapter 5-11 was initiated for the applicant who due to this pre-existing psychiatric condition, did not meet procurement medical fitness standards. It was also noted that the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings and was mentally responsible. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 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 Service-member discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Service-member'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 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) Paragraph 3-9 states a separation will be described as entry-level with service uncharacterized if processing is initiated while a Soldier is in entry-level status. (5) Chapter 5 provides for the basic separation of enlisted personnel for the convenience of the government. (6) Paragraph 5-1, states that a Soldier being separated under this paragraph will be awarded a characterization of service of honorable, general (under honorable conditions), or an uncharacterized description of service if in entry-level status. (7) Paragraph 5-11 specifically provides that Soldiers who were not medically qualified under procurement medical fitness standards, when accepted for enlistment, or who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entry on active duty or active duty training or initial entry training will be separated. A medical proceeding, regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by appropriate medical authority within six months of the Soldier's initial entrance on active duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for entry into the military service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of AR 40-501, Chapter 3. (8) Glossary prescribes entry-level status for RA Soldiers is the first 180 days of continuous AD or the first 180 days of continuous AD following a break of more than 92 days of active military service. 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 "JFW" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-11, Failed Medical/Physical/Procurement Standards. f. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program, governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waiverable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. 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 available AMHRR record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's AMHRR record of service in reference to the facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army are not in the available record. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-11, by reason of "Failed Medical/ Physical/ Procurement Standards," with a characterization of service of Uncharacterized. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Failed Medical/Physical/Procurement Standards," and the separation code is "JFW." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant seeks relief contending that he was encouraged by his doctor to claim a pre- existing mental illness instead of leaving under DADT. He approached his Drill Sergeant in October of 2007 and told him that he was upset about his significant other leaving him and was considering briefly considering suicide. This was a brief feeling but he was brought to a base psychologist. After a short test, he was brought to a mental health facility in Tucson, AZ. When he was brought back to Fort Huachuca he was encouraged to accept a mental health based discharge based on a pre-existing condition instead of being discharged under DADT. The applicant believes he should have his discharge upgraded to an honorable discharge (formerly DADT) because he was encouraged to accept a medical general discharge because it would be worse for him to take a DADT discharge in 2007. Had he not been discharge and been permitted to be open about his sadness regarding his separation from his boyfriend he would have been given counseling and been returned to duty where he would have served his country honorably and been discharged honorably. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, the merit of these contentions cannot be established because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet this burden of proof since the discharge packet is not available in the AMHRR record. It should be noted; AR 635-200 states that a Soldier is in an entry-level status if the Soldier has not completed more than 180 days of creditable continuous active duty prior to the initiation of separation action. AR 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier's service will be uncharacterized when separated in entry-level status. An uncharacterized discharge is neither positive nor negative and it is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means that the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. 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? N/A. The applicant was not discharged for misconduct, so there is no misconduct to which the ADRB can apply liberal consideration to excuse or mitigate. The applicant was discharged due to a pre-existing psychiatric condition, Bipolar Disorder. (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 Contentions: (1) The applicant seeks relief contending that he was encouraged by a medical doctor to claim a pre-existing mental illness instead of leaving under DADT. The applicant told his Drill Sergeant in October of 2007 that he was upset about significant other leaving him and was briefly considering suicide. The applicant was taken to the base psychologist. After a short test, he was brought to a mental health facility in Tucson, AZ. When he was brought back to Fort Huachuca he was encouraged to accept a mental health based discharge based on a pre- existing condition instead of being discharged under DADT. In the applicant's initial BH contact on 5 November 2007 the applicant reported experiencing suicidal ideation and had a history of recurrent depression since age 13 when the applicant was diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder. This diagnosis resulted in the applicant being treated with psychiatric medications and therapy prior to entering the Army. The Board determined the separation was proper and equitable due to the applicant's pre-existing Bipolar Disorder. (2) The applicant believes he should have his discharge upgraded to an honorable discharge (formerly DADT) because he was encouraged to accept a medical general discharge because it would be worse for him to take a DADT discharge in 2007. Had he not been discharge and been permitted to be open about his sadness regarding his separation from his boyfriend he would have been given counseling and been returned to duty where he would have served his country honorably and been discharged honorably. The Board considered this contention and the applicant's assertions, however the Board determined the DADT contention is not supported by the applicant's medical records. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. The applicant has exhausted their appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant's contentions that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant's characterization of service because there were no mitigating factors for the Board to consider, as the applicant was discharged for failing medical procurement standards due to Bipolar diagnosis prior to military service, Uncharacterized is proper and equitable. 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. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, and the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 EPTS - Existed Prior to Service 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 AR20190011327 1