1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 c. Counsel: Yes 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is honorable. The applicant requests to change narrative reason, authority, separation code, and reentry code. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant served on active duty from 18 February 2000 to 19 March 2004. The applicant deployed to Iraq/Kuwait theater twice, in 2001 and 2003, serving as a Helicopter Repair Crew Chief. The applicant’s service was exemplary with no disciplinary problems, receiving various awards and decorations, but after completing the second deployment, began to show signs of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Depression, which included substance abuse, sleeplessness, and anxiety. On 12 February 2004, as the unit was deploying to the third overseas deployment to Iraq, the applicant was counseled regarding performance deficiencies and sought mental health assistance at Fort Riley. The applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) for eight days; punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and, referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program for additional counseling and treatment. In February and March 2004, Army psychiatric professionals at Fort Riley, diagnosed the applicant with Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depression and recommended separation. The applicant was discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-17 (for reference only, 28 June 2021 version of AR 635-200, applicable section is paragraph 5-14), approximately three weeks after the diagnosis. Following the discharge, the applicant received a DUI, ultimately leading to what could be considered as a complete mental breakdown. The applicant provided details of the experiences during deployment and was diagnosed by the Veterans Administration (VA) with PTSD and Depressed Mood. The VA rated the applicant 30 percent service-connected disability for Depression (also claimed as PTSD, Adjustment Disorder and Anxiety Disorder). The applicant became a productive citizen, husband, and father; earning a Bachelor’s Degree in Science in Aviation Maintenance and studying for a Master of Business Administration Degree; worked for defense contractors, currently working for Lockheed Martin Corporation as a Quality Manager. The applicant was misdiagnosed by the Army with an adjustment disorder when the diagnosis should have been PTSD. The applicant’s discharge was inequitable because the mental health conditions, including PTSD and Depression, were major contributing factors in the misconduct with led to the discharge and mitigates the discharge. The applicant’s misconduct was relatively minor considering the significant mental health conditions. The applicant further details the contentions in an allied self-authored statement provided with the application. In a records review conducted on 21 April 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 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 19 March 2004 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 9 March 2004 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood; which mental condition affected the applicant’s ability to effectively perform assigned duties, and would interfere with the effectiveness in a combat theater while serving in the Army. The applicant was absent from the unit from 18 to 26 February 2004 and received a Field Grade Article 15 on 5 March 2004. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 10 March 2004 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: Illegible / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 18 February 2000 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 115 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 15T10, UH-60 Helicopter Repairer / 4 years, 24 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait and Iraq (13 August 2001 – 20 December 2001; 16 February 2003 – 1 June 2003) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, AFEM, ASR / The applicant’s AMHRR reflects award of the ARCOM, however, the award is not reflected on the DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Two Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant’s duty status changed as follows: From “Present for Duty (PDY)” to “Absent Without Leave (AWOL),” effective date 18 February 2004; and, From “Absent Without Leave” to “Present for Duty,” effective date 26 February 2004. FG Article 15, dated 6 March 2004, for, without authority, being absent from the unit (from 18 to 26 February 2004). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Four Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct or performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 8 days: (AWOL, 18 February 2004 – 25 February 2004) / Surrendered to Military Authorities j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Three Reports of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 26 February, 1 March, and 3 March 2004, reflect the applicant wanted out of the Army and decided not to deploy with the unit. The applicant was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the command. The provider(s) determined the applicant was mentally responsible and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depression and recommend for expeditious administrative separation from the Army under AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. Memorandum, subject: Psychiatric Statement on [Applicant], dated 4 March 2004, reflects the Community Mental Health Service considered the applicant to be imminently dangerous. The provider recommended various safety precautions and separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. The applicant provided VA medical records, dated 23 July 2019, reflecting the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD; Major Depressive Disorder; and, Alcohol Abuse (Between 8 October 2004 and 14 January 2005). The applicant provided VA Rating Decision, dated 23 August 2005, reflected the applicant as rated 30 percent service-connected disability for Depression (also claimed as PTSD, adjustment disorder and anxiety disorder). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; legal brief; self-authored statement; various in-service documents; VA Rating Decision; Bay Pines VA Treatment medical documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant became a productive citizen, husband, and father; earning a Bachelor’s Degree in Science in Aviation Maintenance and studying for a Master of Business Administration Degree; worked for defense contractors, currently working for Lockheed Martin Corporation as Quality Manager. 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. 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 of 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 to change narrative reason, authority, separation code, and reentry eligibility (RE) code. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The AMHRR includes evidence the applicant, on three occasions, was evaluated by competent medical authority and determined the applicant had adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression. The provider(s) recommended expeditious administrative separation from the Army under AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. 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 the RE Code should be changed. 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 misdiagnosed PTSD and depression affected behavior, which led to the discharge. The applicant provided several medical documents indicating the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD; Major Depressive Disorder; and, Alcohol Abuse. The VA rated the applicant 30 percent service-connected disability for Depression (also claimed as PTSD, adjustment disorder, and anxiety disorder). The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent mental status evaluations (MSEs) on 26 February, 1 and 3 March 2004, which reflect the applicant was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant was mentally responsible and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depression and recommended for expeditious administrative separation from the Army under AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. The MSEs were considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated minor incident. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates commanders may approve separation on the basis of mental conditions not amounting to disability that potentially interfere with assignment to or performance of duty, and further that performance of duty may be reflected by a single incident. The applicant contends good service, including two combat tours. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. The applicant contends being a productive citizen, husband, and father; earning Bachelor’s Degree and pursuing a Master’s Degree; and, working for defense contractors. 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’s Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and PTSD may mitigate the basis for applicant’s separation. (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 is service connected by the VA for Major Depressive Disorder to include Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and PTSD. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor, after applying liberal consideration, determined that the other medical conditions (Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, or PTSD) do not excuse the basis of separation because applicant’s Adjustment Disorder was the basis for separation, and concur with the three separate MSEs that concluded applicant’s PTSD, or any other BH condition was not a contributing factor. Accordingly, applicant’s Chapter 5-17 discharge for an Adjustment Disorder was appropriate. (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 available evidence did not support a conclusion that any of the applicant’s medical conditions completely outweighed the basis for applicant’s separation. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The Board considered this contention during the proceedings but concluded no change was appropriate for this Chapter 5-17 discharge. (2) The applicant contends the SPD code should be changed. It should be noted that SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations that identify reasons for, and types of, separation from active duty, and administratively linked to the reason for separation. 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. In this case, the Board concluded that no change was appropriate for this Chapter 5-17 discharge. (3) The applicant contends the RE Code should be changed. The Board considered this contention but determined applicant’s RE Code of “3” is appropriate for this Chapter 5-17 discharge and 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 the misdiagnosed PTSD and depression affected behavior, which led to the discharge. The ADRB is not bound by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decisions. There is no law or regulation which requires that an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the Board determination that there was a condition or experience that existed during the applicant’s time in service. The Board must also articulate the nexus between that condition or experience and the basis for separation. Then, the Board must determine that the condition or experience outweighed the basis for separation. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former servicemember is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the ARBA when determining a member’s discharge characterization. In this case, the Board, after liberal consideration, determined that the applicant’s discharge was proper and equitable under Chapter 5-17 based on the applicant’s PTSD and other BH conditions not significantly contributing as factors to the applicant’s Chapter 5-17 basis for separation. (5) The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated minor incident. The Board determined Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates commanders may approve separation on the basis of mental conditions not amounting to disability that potentially interfere with assignment to or performance of duty, and further that performance of duty may be reflected by a single incident. (6) The applicant contends good service, including two combat tours. The Board considered the applicant’s service accomplishments, length and quality of service, and combat service during the proceedings. (7) The applicant contends being a productive citizen, husband, and father; earning Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees; and, working for defense contractors. 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 determined that the post-service accomplishments do not warrant any change to the applicant’s discharge. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. The applicant has exhausted their appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant’s contentions 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 Major Depressive Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, and PTSD do not warrant any change to the Chapter 5-17 discharge that was based on the applicant’s inability to effectively perform assigned duties because of applicant’s Adjustment Disorder, 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 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 AR20210003218 1