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: a. Applicant’s Requests and Issues: 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, the discharge was inequitable and improper because the applicant received unfair and unjust treatment. The applicant contends being abused at basic training and forced to violate their profile for their injured leg, resulting in the use of pain medication and physical therapy after the discharge. The applicant downloaded the self-assessment government PTSD app, and the results indicated a diagnosis of PTSD and recommended the applicant see a therapist. The applicant contends an upgrade would allow job opportunities and veterans’ benefits, and changes to their separation and reentry codes would allow the applicant to reenlist. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 09 November 2023, 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: Entry Level Performance and Conduct / AR 635-200, Chapter 11 / JGA / RE-3 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 5 April 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 March 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant has not been able to meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of maturity and self-discipline to adjust in a timely manner. The applicant has had numerous counseling and failed to adapt to the Army way of life. The applicant has demonstrated character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service and have failed to respond to counseling. (3) Recommended Characterization: Uncharacterized (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 27 March 2012, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 March 2012 / Uncharacterized 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 February 2012 / 4 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / High School Graduate / 125 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / None / 1 month, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: The applicant’s AMHRR reflects award of the NDSM, however, the award is not reflected on the DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Community Mental Health Services Form, 16 March 2012, reflects the applicant is psychologically cleared for administrative action, does not appear to be at risk of harming oneself or others. Orders 093-2209, 2 April 2012, reflect the applicant was to be reassigned to the U.S. Army Transition Point and discharged on 5 April 2012 from the Regular Army. The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) reflects the applicant had not completed the first full term of service. The applicant was discharged under the authority of AR 635-200, paragraph 11, with a narrative reason of Entry Level Performance and Conduct. The DD Form 214 was authenticated with the applicant’s electronic signature. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; self-authored letter; separation file and 11 letters of support. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is going to school and planning to double major in clinical psychology and criminal justice. 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 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) 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 11 provides for the separation of personnel due to unsatisfactory performance, conduct, or both, while in an entry level status (ELS). (6) Paragraph 11-3a (2) stipulates the policy applies to Soldiers who are in entry-level status, undergoing IET, and, before the date of the initiation of separation action, have completed no more than 180 days of creditable continuous AD or IADT or no more than 90 days of Phase II under a split or alternate training option. (See the glossary for precise definition of entry-level status.) (7) Paragraph 11-8 stipulates service will be described as uncharacterized under the provisions of this chapter. (8) Glossary defines 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 “JGA” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11, entry-level performance, and conduct. 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. 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 an upgrade to honorable. The applicant’s Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. An honorable discharge (HD) may be given only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty. An HD is rarely ever granted. The applicant contends separation under Entry Level Status (ELS) was not appropriate and should have received an honorable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 states a separation will be described as entry-level with service uncharacterized if, at the time separation action is initiated, the Soldier has less than 180 days of continuous active-duty service. The evidence of the Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) reflects the applicant was notified on 27 March 2012 of the intent to initiate separation proceedings from the Army. At the time of the notification, the applicant had 34 days of continuous active-duty service. Based on the time in service, the applicant was in an ELS status, and the uncharacterized discharge was appropriate. The applicant contends the SPD code should be changed. The SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations that identify reasons for, and types of, separation from active duty. The primary purpose of SPD codes is to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation. They are intended exclusively for the internal use of DoD and the Military Services to assist in the collection and analysis of separation data. The SPD Codes are controlled by OSD and then implemented in Army policy AR 635-5-1 to track types of separations. The SPD code specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under Chapter 11, is “JGA.” The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable and improper because the applicant received unfair and unjust treatment. The applicant contends being abused at basic training and forced to violate their profile for their injured leg, resulting in the use of pain medication and physical therapy after discharge. The AMHRR reflects the applicant was discharge because, the applicant had not been able to meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of maturity and self-discipline to adjust in a timely manner. The applicant had numerous counseling and failed to adapt to the Army way of life. The applicant has demonstrated character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service and had failed to respond to counseling. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant sought assistance or reported being abused or unfair and unjust treatment. The applicant’s AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends downloading the self-assessment government PTSD app, and the results indicated a diagnosis of PTSD and recommended the applicant see a therapist. The applicant did not submit any evidence, other than the applicant’s statement, to support the contention. The AMHRR reflects a Community Mental Health Services Form, 16 March 2012, reflecting the applicant was psychologically cleared for administrative action, did not appear to be at risk of harming oneself or others. The AMHRR is void of a mental status report. The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge would allow veterans benefits. Eligibility for veteran’s benefits does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of “3.” There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or the RE code. An RE Code of “3” indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army’s needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The third-party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. They all recognize the applicant’s good conduct before and after leaving the Army. The applicant contends attending to school and planning to double major in clinical psychology and criminal justice. 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. 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, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has the following potentially mitigating diagnoses/experiences: Adjustment Disorder. Additionally, the applicant asserts PTSD, which may be sufficient evidence to establish the existence of a condition that could mitigate or excuse the discharge. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board’s Medical Advisor found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder, and the applicant self-asserts PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant’s The applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder after he demonstrated difficulty adjusting to basic training, which is a diagnosis characterized by a mild, transient reaction to a stressful situation. There is no evidence of any other BH conditions or experiences that would offer mitigation for applicant’s Chapter 11 discharge. The applicant asserts PTSD, but there is no medical evidence to support the applicant’s asserted PTSD. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable and SPD code should be changed. The Board considered this contention and determined that a change to the applicant characterization and separation program designator code for the discharge is not warranted because in accordance with AR 600-35 Paragraph 9a, directs a separation will be described as entry-level with service uncharacterized if processing is initiated while a Soldier is in entry- level status, except when DCS, G – 1, on a case-by-case basis, determines that characterization of service as honorable is clearly warranted by the presence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of duty. (2) The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable and improper because the applicant received unfair and unjust treatment. The applicant contends being abused at basic training and forced to violate their profile for their injured leg, resulting in the use of pain medication and physical therapy after the discharge. The applicant did not meet the burden of proof to validate this assertion (treatment, violation of profile, etc…). 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. Also, the applicant’s available AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. (3) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The board considered this contention but does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. (4) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge would allow veterans benefits. The board considered this contention and determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare, or VA loans, do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. (5) The applicant desires to rejoin the military service. The Board considered this contention and voted to maintain the RE-code to a RE-3, which is a waivable code. An RE Code of “3” indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army’s needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes, if appropriate. (6) The applicant contends attending to school and planning to double major in clinical psychology and criminal justice. The board considered this contention and determined that the applicant’s post service accomplishments do not outweigh the discharge Entry Level Performance and Conduct due to pattern of misconducts - numerous counseling for minor disciplinary infractions (inability/lack of reasonable effort and failure to adapt or conform to the military environment) – basis for separation. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant’s contention(s) 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, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicants in service diagnoses Adjustment Disorder and self-asserted PTSD did not excuse or mitigate the applicant pattern of misconduct – numerous counseling for minor disciplinary infractions (inability/lack of reasonable effort and failure to adapt or conform to the military environment). 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 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 AR20210001472 1