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 honorable. The applicant requests a narrative reason, separation code, and reentry (RE) code change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, never being given the opportunity to visit a grandparent before being deployed to Afghanistan or to perform hometown recruiting. The applicant was deploying to Afghanistan and found out the grandparent was terminally ill. The applicant had 34.5 days of accrued leave and was told by the sergeant the applicant would receive a four-day pass, but the pass was revoked because the applicant did not show up on the applicant's day off. The psychiatrist said the command could not just throw the applicant out because the applicant wanted to visit the family before the applicant deployed to Afghanistan. The sergeant did not want the applicant there and said to kick the applicant out. The military doctor indicated in writing; the command went about this the wrong way. The applicant's belongings, worth thousands of dollars, were stolen. The applicant's car was stolen by one of the Soldiers while the applicant was hospitalized, and money was stolen from the ATM card. This would make anyone feel out of place. The applicant was told by the commander, the applicant could reenlist after two years, but the recruiters have not been able to help the applicant reenlist. The recruiters tell the applicant to have the RE code 3 changed to RE code 1. The applicant is not disabled and desires to become a police officer in the Reserve. The military should not just kick people out and ruin a person's career. The command should have worked with the applicant and let the applicant visit the grandparent. This is unjustified. The applicant followed every command given. The applicant has been studying to increase the ASVAB scores and exercising in hopes of joining the Navy or Army National Guard. A recruiter had the applicant take the ASVAB and the applicant received a score of 39, compared to the initial score of 29. The applicant was discharged because of a physical condition, not a disability. The applicant was high on Seroquel when the applicant signed the papers and had no idea the commander was telling lies. The applicant requests to rejoin the military service. The applicant has paperwork from the applicant's general, a psychiatrist, who states the applicant does not have any disorders or anxiety. Chapter 5 -17 (Other Designated Physical or Mental Conditions) is very similar to Chapter 5-13, except it covers conditions which fail to rise to the level of what the doctors call a "disorder." The key factor is that the condition must significantly impair a Soldier's ability to perform assigned military tasks. The applicant performed the tasks very well. It was the command who did not handle it properly. The applicant was not given ample counseling nor an opportunity for rehabilitation. The applicant had two sessions with the psychiatrist. Soldiers have the right to consult with a trial defense service attorney or with private counsel at no expense to the government and to submit matters for the separation authority to consider before the final decision is made regarding separation. Soldiers pending Chapter 5 separation should consult with an attorney before making any decisions concerning the separation. The applicant requests the separation code "JFV," and the reentry code be changed because of false pretenses, and not following protocol or standard policy. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 27 October 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. However, notwithstanding the propriety of the applicant's discharge, the Board found that the applicant's DD Form 214, blocks 25, and 28, contain erroneous entries. The Board directed the following administrative corrections and reissue of the applicant's DD Form 214, as approved by the separation authority: a. block 25, separation authority changed to AR 635-200, paragraph 5-14, b. block 28, narrative reason for separation changed to Condition, Not a Disability. 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: NIF / AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-17 / JFV / RE-3 / Honorable / The applicant's DD Form 214, block 28, Narrative Reason For Separation, does not include a narrative reason. b. Date of Discharge: 21 August 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 July 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: 15 July 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 6 August 2008 / Honorable 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 June 2007 / 3 years, 2 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / Some College / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 92G10, Food Service Operation / 1 year, 1 month, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Developmental Counseling Form, dated 25 June 2008, for being recommended for separation under Chapter 5-17. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 21 March 2008, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment Disorder with Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct. The psychiatrist recommended separation in accordance with AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. The evaluation revealed significant depressive symptoms related to family and job issues, which were preventing the applicant from fulfilling the military duties. Report of Medical History, dated 3 April 2008, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Chapter for personality disorder, anxiety, and depression by Mental Health, currently undergoing treatment. The applicant was hospitalized for suicidal/homicidal thoughts. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends studying to increase the ASVAB scores and increasing the score by 10 points and pursuing becoming a military police officer. 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 provides for the basic separation of enlisted personnel for the convenience of the government. (4) Paragraph 5-1, states 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. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge is normally inappropriate for individuals separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-14 (previously paragraph 5-17) unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service that warrant such characterization. (5) Paragraph 5-14 (previously paragraph 5-17) specifically provides that a Soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty and requires that the diagnosis be so severe that the Soldier's ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired. 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 "JFV" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-14 (previously Chapter 5-17), Condition, Not a Disability. 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. 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 narrative reason, separation code, and reentry code change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) includes evidence the applicant was evaluated by competent medical authority and determined the applicant had adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct. The evaluation revealed significant depressive symptoms related to family and job issues, which were preventing the applicant from fulfilling the military duties. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The applicant's DD Form 214, block 28, is void of a narrative reason for separation. The applicant was separated under the provisions, at the time, of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200 with an honorable discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Condition, Not a Disability," and the separation code is "JFV." 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 exactly 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 the SPD code should be changed. 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. 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 at the time, for a discharge under Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, is "JFV." The applicant contends the reentry code should be changed to rejoin 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. The applicant contends being separated unjustly and not having a mental disorder but was high on medication when the applicant signed the separation documents. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 21 March 2008 and the applicant was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct. The AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends not being provided adequate counseling or rehabilitation. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 1-17, entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states when a Soldier's conduct or performance becomes unacceptable, the commander will ensure that a responsible official formally notifies the Soldier of his/her deficiencies. At least one formal counseling session is required before separation proceedings may be initiated and evidence that the Soldier's deficiencies continued after the initial formal counseling. Rehabilitative measures are required prior to initiating separation proceedings for Chapter 11, Chapter 13, Chapter 14-12a and b. Soldiers will be locally reassigned at least once, between battalion-sized units or larger when considered necessary by the local commander. The AMHRR reflects the applicant was counseled on 25 June 2008 for being recommended for separation. There was no rehabilitative transfer requirement for Soldiers separated under Chapter 5-17. The applicant contends good service. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. 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 studying to increase the ASVAB scores and increasing the score by 10 points and pursuing becoming a military police officer. 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 the following diagnoses or experiences which can, under certain circumstances, potentially mitigate or excuse misconduct leading to separation: Adjustment Disorder, Major Depression. (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 Adjustment Disorder and Major Depression. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor opined that the applicant was diagnosed in service with Adjustment Disorder and Major Depression, but already has an HD. Applicant's narrative reason for discharge based on the diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder was appropriate, but should be administratively updated to Chapter 5-14, Other Designated Physical or Mental Conditions. It is recommended that the applicant's RE Code remain a 3 due to BH history including multiple inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. The Board considered the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor and after liberally considering the evidence determined that the applicant already holds an Honorable discharge and given that the applicant was not discharged for misconduct, rather, the discharge was based on the diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder and Major Depression, there is no medical mitigation warranting an upgrade. The Board also concurred with the recommendation of the Board's Medical Advisor and voted to administratively correct the authority to AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-14, and the narrative reason to Condition, Not a Disability. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The Board noted that the applicant's DD Form 214, block 28, is void of a narrative reason for separation. The applicant was separated under the provisions, at the time, of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200. The Board determined that the narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Condition, Not a Disability," and the separation code is "JFV." 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 exactly 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. Along with the administrative correction to the narrative reason for separation, the Board voted to update the authority to AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-14. (2) The applicant contends the SPD code should be changed. The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant received the appropriate SPD code for the discharge specified by AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, now being administratively updated to paragraph 5-14, is JFV. Therefore, no change is warranted. (3) The applicant contends the reentry code should be changed to rejoin military service. The Board considered this contention and voted to maintain the RE-code to a RE-3, which is a waivable code due to the applicant's service limiting BH history to include multiple inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations. 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. (4) The applicant contends being separated unjustly and not having a mental disorder but was high on medication when the applicant signed the separation documents. The Board considered this contention and noted that the applicant's Adjustment Disorder, and Major Depression were diagnosed during military service and considered by the separation authority, and the applicant's consultation took place prior to separation on 15 July 2008. The applicant did not provide supporting documentation by a qualified medical professional to provide merit to the claim, and the applicant's characterization is already Honorable, thus no relief is warranted. (5) The applicant contends not being provided adequate counseling or rehabilitation. The Board considered this contention and determined that Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 1-17, entitled counseling and rehabilitative requirements, states when a Soldier's conduct or performance becomes unacceptable, the commander will ensure that a responsible official formally notifies the Soldier of his/her deficiencies. At least one formal counseling session is required before separation proceedings may be initiated and evidence that the Soldier's deficiencies continued after the initial formal counseling. Rehabilitative measures are required prior to initiating separation proceedings for Chapter 11, Chapter 13, Chapter 14-12a and b. Soldiers will be locally reassigned at least once, between battalion-sized units or larger when considered necessary by the local commander. The AMHRR reflects the applicant was counseled on 25 June 2008 for being recommended for separation. There was no rehabilitative transfer requirement for Soldiers separated under Chapter 5-17. (6) The applicant contends good service. The Board considered the totality of the applicant's service record, but determined the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the applicant's BH history is service limiting, and the applicant already holds an Honorable discharge. (7) The applicant contends studying to increase the ASVAB scores and increasing the score by 10 points and pursuing becoming a military police officer. The ADRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. 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. In this case, the Board considered this contention and determined that since the applicant already holds an Honorable discharge, no further relief is warranted. c. The Board determined that aside from the pending administrative correction, 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 characterization of service due to it already being Honorable. (2) The Board voted to change the applicant's reason for discharge because, although the Board found the discharge proper and equitable and there was no misconduct which the applicant's BH conditions would mitigate to warrant relief, it was found that there was an administrative error on the applicant's DD Form 214, thus making the current reason for discharge improper. The corrected reason for discharge will be Condition, Not a Disability The SPD code associated with the updated reason for discharge will remain JFV. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation and the applicant's BH condition of Adjustment Disorder, Major Depression, as well as history of inpatient psychiatric hospitalizations is service limiting. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change. c. Change Reason / SPD code to: Condition, Not a Disability/No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-14 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 AR20210002393 1