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 uncharacterized. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he requests an upgrade of his reason, separation code, and reentry code because he was misdiagnosed while he was on active duty. The applicant received a discharge instead of a regular grievance period over a family member passing away. The applicant states he does not have an adjustment disorder, which had been verified through a civilian doctor and he was cleared through Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) and the Department of Defense Medical Examination Review Board (DoDMERB) for college ROTC. The applicant was discharged from the Army for Adjustment Disorder. The circumstances occurred during basic training and led to his discharge. The applicant went to basic training after his grandmother and uncle passed away from cancer and a relative who was hospitalized due to a car accident, a month prior to the applicant’s departure for training. While at Fort Benning, the applicant was approached by his Drill Sergeant and asked how he was doing. The applicant responded he was grieving over his family members. The drill sergeant suggested coping classes and the applicant was sent to the mental health clinic to undergo coping skills classes, instead the applicant received a discharge. The applicant was placed on a profile and was unable to carry a rifle or attend range exercises, but the profile was ignored because he still handled weapons and ammunition, further proving he was and is mentally sound. Since the applicant’s discharge, he has seen a psychiatrist to clear the misdiagnosis because he knows he does not have a problem adjusting. The applicant further details in a second four-page self-authored statement his inability to find fulltime employment after his discharge. The applicant visited a private mental health clinic to clear his diagnosis. The applicant went to the MEPS and was cleared there as well. A waiver was submitted, but was disapproved for the same discharge reason, Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety – Depressed Mood. The applicant attended college, pursuing an Associates of Science Degree for Engineering. The applicant joined college ROTC in an attempt to rejoin the military. The applicant cleared the ROTC medical screening and received an approved medical waiver from the DODMERB, but when it was submitted, it was disapproved. The applicant lost his wife because he spent so much time pursuing a dead dream. The applicant joined the police academy and became a peace officer. The applicant made multiple attempts to join the police department, but was denied due to his discharge. The applicant finally succeeded in joining the police department and performed duties normally performed by the SWAT team, working narcotics and other dangerous cases which involve serving warrants. The applicant is scheduled to attend SWAT school, basic police sniper school, and college courses, but he still has an extensive interest in rejoining the military. Further, the applicant’s discharge will prevent him from moving up to the federal level agencies, specifically the U.S. Marshal Service. In a records review conducted on 17 March 2022, 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: Condition, Not a Disability / AR 635-200, Paragraph 5-17 / JFV / RE-3 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 18 November 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 5 October 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 19 July 2016, the applicant was diagnosed by Fort Benning Community Behavioral Health Services for Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood. (3) Recommended Characterization: Uncharacterized (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 5 October 2016, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: Undated / Uncharacterized 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 August 2016 / 3 years, 20 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / None / 2 months, 26 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: None g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Three Developmental Counseling Forms, regarding the applicant’s diagnosis by Community Mental Health Services and being recommended for separation under AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. The applicant provided Sigma Mental Health, Urgent Care letter, dated 2 November 2017, reflected the psychiatrist evaluated the applicant on separate occasions, reviewed his medical records, and had a discussion with the applicant’s family members. The psychiatrist did not find any concern for psychiatric illness that would have precluded the applicant from joining the military. The applicant provided a Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Licensee Psychological and Emotional Health Declaration, dated 15 August 2019, reflecting the psychologist found the applicant was in satisfactory psychological and emotional health to perform the duties, accept the responsibilities, and met the qualifications established by the appointing agency. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 19 September 2016, with attached memorandum, reflects the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and could appreciate the difference between right and wrong. The applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. The clinical psychologist determined the disorder was of sufficient severity to interfere with the applicant’s ability to function in the military and recommended the applicant be discharged under AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; two self-authored statements; DA Form 4856; DD Form 214; five DD Forms 370; two College letters; civilian medical documents; separation packet; enlistment documents; college transcripts; Texas Commission Law Enforcement mental status evaluations, drug testing, and various training courses. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states he is pursuing his college education; was a member of the college ROTC program; he is employed at the police department; and is scheduled to attend SWAT school and the basic police sniper school. 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 5 provides for the basic separation of enlisted personnel for the convenience of the government. (5) 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. (6) 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. (7) Chapter 15 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. (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 “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-3 applies to a 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 AMHRR includes evidence the applicant, while in training status, was evaluated by competent medical authority and determined the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. It was determined the disorder was of sufficient severity to interfere with the applicant’s ability to function in the military. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions, at the time, of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) 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 he was grieving over family issues and did not have an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety, depressed moods. The applicant’s AMHRR reflects the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation (MSE) on 19 September 2016, which reflects the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and could appreciate the difference between right and wrong. The applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. The clinical psychologist recommended the applicant be discharged under AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. The MSE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends the diagnosis of an adjustment disorder was disproved by civilian doctors after he was discharged. The applicant provided medical documents reflecting the examining psychiatrist did not find any concern for psychiatric illness which would have precluded the applicant from joining the military and psychologist found the applicant’s psychological and emotional health satisfactory to perform duties with Texas Law Enforcement. 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 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. The applicant contends he is pursuing his college education; was a member of the college ROTC program; he is employed at the police department; and is scheduled to attend SWAT school and the basic police sniper school. 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 and determined the applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board’s Medical Advisor found the applicant had been diagnosed with an in-service Adjustment Disorder. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board’s Medical Advisor, after applying liberal consideration, found that applicant’s diagnosed in-service Adjustment Disorder is cited as the basis for the separation and applicant’s post- service civilian medical documentation indicating no BH conditions in 2017 or 2019 does not negate the in-service diagnosis of an Adjustment Disorder that was clinically documented in 2016 as the unmitigated basis for applicant’s separation. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the Board’s application of liberal consideration, the Board concurred with the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the applicant’s in-service Adjustment Disorder was the basis for applicant’s separation and that disorder does not in turn then outweigh that discharge. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason and SPD code for the discharge needs changed. 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 Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code, as the narrative reason and SPD code were proper and equitable. (2) The applicant contends he was grieving over family issues and did not have an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety, depressed moods. The Board considered this contention but determined that this contention does not warrant any change to the discharge. (3) The applicant contends the diagnosis of an adjustment disorder was disproved by civilian doctors after he was discharged. The Board determined the post-service civilian medical documentation indicating no BH conditions in 2017 or 2019 does not negate the in-service diagnosis of an Adjustment Disorder that was clinically documented in 2016 as the basis for applicant’s separation. (4) 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. (5) The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. The Board considered this contention but determined the applicant’s RE-3 code was both proper and equitable, and 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 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, the applicant’s BH diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder did not mitigate the uncharacterized discharge, as the applicant was in Entry Level Status not in the Army long enough for a character of service to be rated as honorable, and a General Discharge is not authorized, and the discharge was both proper and equitable. 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 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 AR20210003141 1