1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 5 February 2020 b. Date Received: 5 February 2020 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is honorable. The applicant requests a narrative reason change to HBF (Early Release Attend School) and a change to her reentry eligibility (RE) code to a 1. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that she was released with an honorable discharge and a good conduct medal. The good conduct medal states she had exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity inactive federal military service. She contends that she had maintained this disciplined behavior while being a civilian since she has been out of the military. She always worked hard while being in the military. She put her mission first and has a huge respect for the United States Military. She will always love the uniform she wore for 3 years and 21 weeks. However, while she was overseas in South Korea, there was small personality problems between herself and a superior she worked with. This has caused her to be counseled overtime. Some of her counseling statements were untrue, she couldn't restrain it, as time went on she sought professional therapy for her adversity, so she was released early, after she was released she went to school. She contends she is a hardworking, dedicated, and committed individual to her occupation even to this day. The military has made her a better person and she will always be grateful she was able to serve this country. In a records review conducted on 13 October 2021, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is inequitable based on the applicant's length and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, such as the in-service diagnoses of OBH and service-connected PTSD/IPV. Therefore, the Board directed the issue of a new DD Form 214 changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 15, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, but no change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 3. 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: Unsatisfactory Performance / AR 635- 200 / Chapter 13 / JHJ / RE-3 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 23 October 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: NIF; however, the unit commander's recommendation memorandum indicates the applicant between on or about 6 March 2017 and 11 August 2017, demonstrated a lack of respect for her leadership. She failed to communicate with her leadership on multiple occasions, about losing her CAC, and hitting a parked car. The applicant showed a failure to adapt and often in the wrong place with the wrong uniform. She also lost equipment and clothing. She showed an inability to work well with noncommissioned officers and made statements about not wanting to be a noncommissioned officer. Several months in a row she was recommended for non- promotion. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 October 2017 / Honorable 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 April 2014 / 3 years, 21 weeks (The applicant extended her enlistment 12 months on 7 April 2014, giving her a new ETS date of 31 August 2018) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92G10, Culinary Specialist / 3 years, 6 months, 17 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None 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; DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action for Promotion to E-4); recommendation for award of the Army Achievement Medal (AAM); Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecards; certificate for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, three Army Achievement Medal's; certificate's for the Dean's List with GPA's between 3.8 and 3.96; attendance certificate; counseling statement reference not being recommendation for promotion, 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) Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. (4) Paragraph 13-10, prescribes for the service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by their military records. An honorable characterization of service generally is required when the Government initially introduces limited use evidence. (5) Chapter 15 provides for the basic separation of enlisted personnel for the convenience of the government. It 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. 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 "JHJ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, unsatisfactory performance. 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-1 Applies to: Person completing his or her term of active service who is considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army. Eligibility: Qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met. 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. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests a narrative reason change to HBF (Early Release Attend School) and a change to her reentry eligibility (RE) code to a 1. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. Evidence in the AMHRR record indicates separation action was initiated against the applicant for between on or about 6 March 2017 and 11 August 2017, demonstrating a lack of respect for her leadership, failing to communicate with her leadership on multiple occasions, about losing her CAC, and hitting a parked car. The applicant showed a failure to adapt and often in the wrong place with the wrong uniform. She also lost equipment and clothing. She showed an inability to work well with noncommissioned officers and made statements about not wanting to be a noncommissioned officer. Several months in a row she was recommended for non- promotion. The applicant seeks relief contending that she was released with an honorable discharge and a good conduct medal. The good conduct medal states she had exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity inactive federal military service. She contends that she had maintained this disciplined behavior while being a civilian since she has been out of the military. She always worked hard while being in the military. She put her mission first and has a huge respect for the United States Military. She will always love the uniform she wore for 3 years and 21 weeks. However, while she was overseas in South Korea, there was small personality problems between herself and a superior she worked with. This has caused her to be counseled overtime. Some of her counseling statements were untrue, she couldn't restrain it, as time went on she sought professional therapy for her adversity, so she was released early, after she was released she went to school. She contends she is a hardworking, dedicated, and committed individual to her occupation even to this day. The military has made her a better person and she will always be grateful she was able to serve this country. The applicant's record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army. However, the applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200 with an honorable discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance," and the separation code is "JHJ." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates 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 appropriate RE code is 3. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, it is unknown if these contentions have merit because the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the service record. The burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents such as the complete 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 still be her responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the complete discharge packet is not available in the official record. 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. The applicant held in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, MDD, Anxiety Disorder, and Social Anxiety Disorder with FAP involvement as a victim of IPV. Post- service, the applicant is service connected for MDD with additional diagnoses of Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), Panic Disorder, and PTSD related to in-service assaults and IPV. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant held in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, MDD, Anxiety Disorder, and Social Anxiety Disorder with FAP involvement as a victim of IPV. Applicant's file contains in-service assaults. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. Due to the nexus between IPV and being assaulted in-service, the applicant's numerous instances of documented trouble with authority are mitigated. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that mitigating BH illnesses of the in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder, MDD, Anxiety Disorder, and Social Anxiety Disorder with FAP involvement as a victim of IPV, plus Post-service additional diagnoses of Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), Panic Disorder, and PTSD related to in- service assaults and IPV are often associated with the applicant's reason for discharge of Unsatisfactory Performance. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the BH conditions outweighed the cause for separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant seeks relief contending that she was released with an honorable discharge and a good conduct medal. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to change the narrative reason for the applicant's separation based upon reason being inequitable. (2) The applicant requests a narrative reason change to HBF (Early Release Attend School) and a change to her reentry eligibility (RE) code to a 1. After careful review of the applicant's records, the Board voted to change the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and no change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 3, based upon the post-service diagnoses of GAD, Panic Disorder and PTSD. c. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant's characterization of service because the applicant's characterization is already Honorable. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority since the PTSD/assault/IPV diagnoses mitigated the difficulties with authority the applicant was discharged for, thus the reason for discharge is no longer appropriate. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JFF. (3) The RE code will not change based upon the service-limiting, post-service diagnoses of GAD, Panic Disorder and PTSD. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Secretarial Authority / JFF d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 15 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 AR20200003431 3