1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 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 RE code change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, she was sexually assaulted by another Soldier while deployed which caused her to have emotional and physical issues. Once presented with the evidence, the Department of Veterans Affairs granted her VA benefits due to regulations governing the character and reason of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. She is forever grateful to the Army Review Boards Agency for upgrading her discharge in 2020 from under other than honorable to honorable. As grateful as she is, it was a disappointment to see her rank was lowered, and the Re-entry Code on her DD Form 214 is a number four, which does not allow for reentry into the military, National Guard or going into a training program to work in law enforcement. These are things she would like to be able to do, but her hands are tied with an RE-4 code. It is her desire to either join the military again and finish what she started or join the National Guard, or work in law enforcement. The Board file contains her military personnel file, which outlines all her awards and medals detailing her high performance level and her love for her job. The file shows her quick deterioration of her career after the MST while in the Army serving in Kandahar. Before this incident, her plan was to serve four years, then reenlist. If the Army Review Boards Agency changes the reentry code on her DD Form 214, she would have the opportunity to serve her country in some way. In a records review conducted on 27 January 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the RE-code is inequitable based on the applicant's quality of service, to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI, MST, and PTSD diagnoses). Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the reentry code to RE-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: Secretarial Authority / AR 635-200, Chapter 5-3 / JFF / RE-4 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 10 August 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date Charges Preferred (DD Form 458, Charge Sheet): On 20 July 2012, the applicant was charged with: Violating Article 86, UCMJ, for being AWOL from 26 November 2011 to 12 July 2012. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 20 July 2012 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 August 2012 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 January 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 23 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25L10, Cable Systems Installer/Maintainer / 1 year, 11 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (18 August 2010 - 4 August 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge sheet as described in previous paragraph 3c. Military Police Report, dated 6 December 2010, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Failing to Obey General Order 1B (on post). The applicant voluntarily admitted to consuming alcohol with her friends at the MWR building on Camp Stone. Military Police Report, dated 28 November 2011, reflects the applicant was charged with: AWOL, Failure to Report to duty (on post). Military Police Report, dated 2 July 2012, reflects the applicant was charged for: AWOL, Surrendered to military and civilian authorities (on post). CID Report of Investigation Final, dated 10 December 2012, determined there was no probable cause to believe the alleged offense of sexual assault occurred. Two Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective date 25 November 2011 and, From "AWOL" to "Dropped from Rolls (DFR)," effective 12 July 2012. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 229 days (AWOL, 25 November 2011 - 11 July 2012 / Surrendered to military and civilian control j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of her VA disability rating decision, dated 14 April 2015, which reflects the applicant was rated 50 percent disability for PTSD with Alcohol abuse. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, DD Form 293; ADRB Decision Letter, DA Form 638; Four Award Certificates; VA Rating Decision; Four Letters of Support and a copy of the applicant text messages. 6. Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted with 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 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 5-3 (Chapter 15 of current regulation) 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 memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. (4) Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. (5) Paragraph 10-8a stipulates a discharge under other than honorable conditions normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record during the current enlistment. (See chap 3, sec II.) (6) Paragraph 10b stipulates Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper. 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 "JFF" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-3, Secretarial Authority. 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-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation, or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years' active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. 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 a RE code change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel, voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and indicated an understanding an under other than honorable conditions discharge could be received, and the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. The applicant contends the VA has granted her a service connected disability for PTSD. The applicant's AMHRR contains no documentation of PTSD diagnosis. The applicant provided a copy of her VA disability rating decision, dated 14 April 2015, which reflects the applicant was rated 50 percent disability for PTSD with Alcohol abuse. The AMHRR is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant contends she was sexually assaulted by another Soldier while deployed which caused her to have emotional and physical issues. A CID Report of Investigation Final, dated 10 December 2012, determined there was no probable cause to believe the alleged offense of sexual assault occurred. The AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. Soldiers processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 601-210 and the reason at the time of her separation, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of "4." The applicant contends her rank should be restored. The applicant's requested change to the DD Form 214 does not fall within this board's purview. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. 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's current discharge characterization of service is Honorable. (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 the VA has granted her a service connected disability for PTSD. Applicant's current characterization is Honorable; therefore, there is no medical mitigation required for a characterization upgrade. (2) The applicant contends she was sexually assaulted by another Soldier while deployed which caused her to have emotional and physical issues. Applicant's current characterization is Honorable; therefore, there is no medical mitigation required for a characterization upgrade. (3) The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. The Board considered this contention and determined an RE-code change to a RE-3, is appropriate and equitable based on applicant's current discharge characterization as Honorable, while continuing to have a medical condition that could affect re-entry into the military. An RE Code of "3" indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. (4) The applicant contends her rank should be restored. The Board determined that the applicant's requested change to the DD Form 214 does not fall within the purview of the ADRB. The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using a DD Form 149 regarding this matter. A DD Form 149 may be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. (5) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered applicant's quality of service c. The Board determined the RE-code is inequitable based on the applicant's quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBHI, MST, and PTSD diagnoses). d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant's characterization of service because it is already Honorable. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code as they are proper for Secretarial Authority/JFF. (3) The Board voted to upgrade the applicant's current RE-code to RE-3 as appropriate and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: RE-3 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 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 AR20210000794 1