1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 31 August 2021 b. Date Received: 7 September 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 along with a separation program designator (SPD) code and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the command was in frequent contact with the applicant’s family concerning the applicant’s military career and was not allowed to make independent decisions and was held back from several opportunities. This took a toll on the applicant’s mental health which led to the applicant attempting suicide on two occasions. The applicant was unfairly confined to the barracks and barred from leaving the base due to the control and contact of superior’s influence and contact with the applicant’s family. The situation escalated and the applicant was confined civilian authorities after the second suicide attempt. The applicant was forced to follow orders and was then punished for following said orders. The applicant has not been able to hold steady employment and was forced on unemployability through the Department of Veteran Affairs. The applicant was diagnosed with severe generalized anxiety and severe depression. The applicant was discharged due to a condition, not a disability, but other doctors believe it is a disability. The applicant states there was honorable service worthy of an honorable discharge. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 19 January 2024, 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, Chapter 5-17 / JFV / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 6 March 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 February 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant had been evaluated by Adult Behavioral Health and diagnosed with having adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct. As it pertained to the applicant’s characterization of service, the applicant was AWOL twice, apprehended for driving while license was suspended, made a false official statement, and failed to report to the place of duty at the prescribed time on multiple occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant waived the right to consult with counsel on 19 February 2009. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 February 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 September 2007 (DD Form 214 incorrectly shows 31 May 2007) / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 116 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 44C10, Financial Management Technician / 2 years, 11 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 31 May 2007 – 11 August 2007 / UNC (Concurrent Service) (IADT) USAR, 7 March 2006 – 19 September 2007 / NIF e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) The applicant was counseled on multiple occasions for various forms of misconduct. (2) Personnel Action Forms shows the applicant duty status changed from “Present for Duty (PDY)” to AWOL effective 7 January 2009; from AWOL to PDY effective 9 January 2009; PDY to AWOL effective 30 January 2009; AWOL to PDT effective 1 February 2008; and from PDY to Civilian Confinement effective 20 February 2009. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL X 2 days / Returned (30 January 2008 – 31 January 2008) AWOL X 2 days / Returned (7 January 2009 – 8 January 2009) Civilian Confinement X 14 days (20 February 2009 – 6 March 2009) j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: The applicant provides page17of Progress Notes, printed on 1 March 2012, which reflects, in part, the mental health diagnosis documented on the applicant’s discharge paperwork is adjustment disorder with disturbance or emotions and conduct. It was the author’s opinion the diagnosis was incorrect. Individuals with an adjustment disorder do not experience severe enough mental health symptoms to compel them to attempt suicide. (2) AMHRR Listed: Mental Status Evaluation (MSE), 23 January 2009, reflects the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings and was mentally responsible. The applicant was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with disturbance of emotions and conduct. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, Progress Notes (page 17), personal statement. 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), dated 25 September 2019, 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) 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. (5) Paragraph 5-1, states that 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. It further states no Soldier will be awarded a character of service under honorable conditions under this chapter unless the Soldier is notified of the specific factors in his/her record that warrants such a characterization, using the notification system. A general (under honorable conditions characterization is normally inappropriate for Soldiers separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-4, 5-11, 5-12, 5-15, 5- 16, or 5-17. (6) 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. 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, paragraph 5-17, Condition, Not a Disability. 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 along with a SPD code and narrative reason change. The applicant’s Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, due to a Condition, Not a Disability, with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. 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. It further states no Soldier will be awarded a character of service under honorable conditions under this chapter unless the Soldier is notified of the specific factors in his/her record that warrants such a characterization, using the notification system. The applicant’s AMHRR reflects on 19 February 2009, the applicant was notified of the specific factors pertaining to the characterization of service to include being AWOL twice, being apprehended for driving while license was suspended, making a false official statement, and failing to report to the place of duty at the prescribed time on multiple occasions. The applicant requests an SPD code and narrative reason change. The applicant was separated under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, 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 the 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 listed in tables 2-2 or 2-2 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 or SPD code to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends, in effect, the command was in frequent contact with the applicant’s family concerning the applicant’s military career and was not allowed to make independent decisions and was held back from several opportunities. This took a toll on the applicant’s mental health which led to the applicant attempting suicide on two occasions. The applicant was unfairly confined to the barracks and barred from leaving the base due to the control and contact of superior’s influence and contact with the applicant’s family. The situation escalated and the applicant was confined civilian authorities after the second suicide attempt. The applicant was forced to follow orders and was then punished for follow said orders. The applicant states the applicant has not been able to hold steady employment and was forced on unemployability through the Department of Veteran Affairs. The applicant was diagnosed with severe generalized anxiety and severe depression. The applicant was discharged due to a condition, not a disability, but other doctors believe it is a disability. The applicant states there was honorable service worthy of an honorable discharge. The Board will consider the applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. 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: the applicant held an in- service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder. Post-service, he is service connected for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) as a progression of the in-service Adjustment Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant held an in-service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that after reviewing the records, the discharge was proper and equitable. (1) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the in-service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder did not outweigh the basis of separation. b. Prior Decisions Cited: None c. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends the command was in frequent contact with the applicant’s family concerning the applicant’s military career and was not allowed to make independent decisions and was held back from several opportunities. This took a toll on the applicant’s mental health which led to the applicant attempting suicide on two occasions. The Board considered this contention and determined there was no evidence presented to the Board to convince the Board of any mitigating circumstances. 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. In light of the current evidence of record, the Board determined the applicant’s discharge was appropriate (2) The applicant was unfairly confined to the barracks and barred from leaving the base due to the control and contact of superior’s influence and contact with the applicant’s family. The situation escalated and the applicant was confined civilian authorities after the second suicide attempt. The applicant was forced to follow orders and was then punished for follow said orders. The Board considered this contention and determined there was no evidence presented to the Board to convince the Board of any mitigating circumstances. 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. In light of the current evidence of record, the Board determined the applicant’s discharge was appropriate (3) The applicant states there was honorable service worthy of an honorable discharge. The Board considered this contention and determined that a change to the applicant’s characterization of service is not warranted because the reason for the applicant's separation and the character of service the applicant received upon separation were proper and equitable. As it pertained to the applicant’s characterization of service, the applicant was AWOL twice, apprehended for driving while license was suspended, made a false official statement, and failed to report to the place of duty at the prescribed time on several occasions. d. 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 contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. e. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board carefully considered the applicant's request, supporting documents, evidence in the records, a medical review, and published Department of Defense guidance for liberal consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant's statement, record of service, the frequency and nature of misconduct, and the reason for separation. The Board found insufficient evidence of an in-service mitigating factors, and concurred with the conclusion of the medical advising official that the applicant's Adjustment Disorder does not mitigate the applicant's misconduct (FTRs, AWOLs, apprehended for driving while license was suspended, made a false official statement). Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the reason for the applicant's separation and the character of service the applicant received upon separation were proper and equitable. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, as 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 AR20220000538 1