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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, mental issues coinciding with PTSD kept the applicant from being able to perform to standard. The applicant had many issues with peers and the chain of command. The applicant was unable to understand the treatment the applicant was receiving because of unclear thoughts. The applicant suffered from depression, anxiety and panic attacks while in Afghanistan and the performance was never the same. The applicant states not being able to maintain a high level of performance and letting the peers, chain of command and most importantly the family down. The applicant wishes they had the option to do it over again so the applicant can prove why the applicant is worthy of being a Soldier. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 9 November 2022, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's partially mitigating PTSD, length and quality of service, to include combat service, letters of support, and relatively minor nature of the misconduct outweighing the basis for separation - FTRs, APFT failures, and intent to deceive. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to Honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason/SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 21 June 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 1 June 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant failed two consecutive record Army Physical Fitness Tests; The applicant failed a record Army Physical Test on 22 March 2011 and 21 April 2011; The applicant received a Summarized Article 15 for going from the appointed place of duty and for failing to go to the appointed place of duty on 17 May 2011; and, On 6 July 2010, the applicant received a Field Grade Article 15 for intent to deceive. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 1 June 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 June 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 September 2008 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / GED / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 15P10, Aviation Operations Specialist, 2 years, 9 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (13 November 2009 - 3 November 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ACM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 6 July 2010, for with intent to deceive, turn in Armed Forces Classification Test results, which test results were false in which the applicant had not taken the test on or about 17 May 2010. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $723 pay per month for two months (suspended); and, extra duty for 30 days. Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 May 2011, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant was mentally responsible with a clear thought process. Summarized Article 15, dated 17 May 2011, for without authority, go from the appointed place of duty to sick call on or about 7 April 2011; and, without authority fail to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty on or about 7 March 2011. The punishment consisted of extra duty for seven days. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for unsatisfactory performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of the VA health summary, dated 22 June 2016, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, depression not otherwise stated (NOS). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; VA Summary Letter; My HeatheVet records. 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), 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) 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) 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. (5) Paragraph 13-8, 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. 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-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 record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions). The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance," and the separation code is "JHJ." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and 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 regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends being diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. The applicant provided a copy of the VA health summary, dated 22 June 2016, which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, depression nos; and, a copy of VA benefits summary letter, dated 4 February 2017, which reflects the applicant was granted 90 percent combined service-connected disabilities. The applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 13 May 2011, which indicates the applicant was mentally responsible and recognized right from wrong. The MSE does not indicate any diagnosis. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends having issues with peers and the chain of command. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. 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 601-201, 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. 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: PTSD. Additionally, the applicant asserts Depression and Anxiety, 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's PTSD existed during military service, and also that the applicant self-asserts having Anxiety and Depression during service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that given the nexus between PTSD and avoidance, there may have been an association between applicant's PTSD and the FTRs. However, there is no natural sequelae between PTSD and failing APFT or intending to deceive. Applicant also self-asserts having depression and anxiety at the time of military service, but neither of these conditions mitigate failing APFT or intending to deceive either. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that although the applicant's PTSD mitigates the FTRs, the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant's PTSD, Depression, or Anxiety outweighed the remaining basis for applicant's separation - failing the APFT and intending to deceive - for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant was properly separated under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance," and the separation code is "JHJ." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214, and dictates entry of the narrative reason for separation. The Board voted to upgrade the characterization of service to Honorable based on the applicant's partially mitigating PTSD, length and quality of service to include combat service, letters of support, and relatively minor nature of the misconduct outweighing the basis for separation. However, the Board also determined no other relief was warranted. (2) The applicant contends being diagnosed with PTSD by the VA. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant's partially mitigating PTSD, along with applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, letters of support, and relatively minor nature of the misconduct outweighed the basis for separation thus, warranting an upgrade to Honorable. (3) The applicant contends having issues with peers and the chain of command. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the applicant's PTSD, length and quality of service to include combat service, letters of support, and relatively minor nature of the misconduct outweighing the basis for separation. (4) The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. The Board considered this contention and voted to maintain the RE-code at 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. c. The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's partially mitigating PTSD, length and quality of service to include combat service, letters of support, and relatively minor nature of the misconduct outweighing the basis for separation - FTRs, APFT failures, and intent to deceive. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's partially mitigating PTSD, length and quality of service to include combat service, letters of support, and relatively minor nature of the misconduct outweighed the basis for separation - FTRs, APFT failures, and intent to deceive. Thus the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code 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: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 AR20210002329 1