1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 16 January 2017 b. Date Received: 23 January 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he made some poor choices as an NCO, and he has no excuse for the DUI incident. He accepts full responsibility for his actions and understands the severity of the situation. After serving his Article 15 punishment, he continued to live up to the Army Values and ensured he was at the right place at the right time at all times. Although he requested to remain in service, he was discharged and forced to leave Okinawa and returned to Hawaii with very little funds and no family remaining on the island. He enrolled in school at a Technical Institute and excelled, while working six jobs consistently transitioning from one job to the next. He has zero incidents with the law, not even a traffic ticket. He will never have any future alcohol related incidents. He cannot change what happened-all he can do now is move forward. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, the applicant has not specifically contended mental health had anything to do with problems, including DUI, which led to his discharge. He has AHLTA diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety, ADHD, and Major Depression (single episode). He received his Separation Medical Exam on 15 June 2012, and was cleared for administrative discharge. He had treatment in 2005 for ADHD and Major Depression, as a teen dependent. During a command directed evaluation on 23 April 2012, he denied symptoms consistent with either PTSD or TBI. He was cleared for administrative action, and met medical retention standards at that time. In the JLV, he has no VA entries. He has no mitigating condition for his misconduct. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 April 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 28 July 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 July 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant hit a tree in a residential area while operating his vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a 0.284 percent BAC on 5 February 2012. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 13 July 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 20 July 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 October 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 14T10, Patriot Launching Station Enhanced Operator/Maintainer / 4 years, 1 month, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR (31 August 2007 to 15 June 2008) / NA RA (16 June 2008 to 25 October 2010) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Japan, SWA / Kuwait (15 March 2009 to 15 March 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2; AGCM; NDSM; GWOTEM; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR g. Performance Ratings: 1 June 2011 thru 17 April 2012, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: MP Report, dated 20 March 2012, indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for drunk driving and personal injury. Negative counseling statement for receiving a traffic citation; hitting a tree with his vehicle causing injury to himself and major to the vehicle; and letting his unit and family down. FG Article 15, dated 18 April 2012, for operating a vehicle while drunk on 5 February 2012. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $1,078 pay per month for two months, and 45 days of extra duty and restriction. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 7 May 2012, indicates the applicant was reprimanded for driving his vehicle at a high rate of speed, losing control, and striking a tree, with a BAC of 0.284 percent. Mental Status evaluation conducted on 23 April 2012, indicates the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by his commander. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 9 May 2012, indicates the applicant and the examiner noted behavioral health issues. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 17 January 2017. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, he enrolled in school at a Technical Institute and excelled, while working six jobs consistently transitioning from one job to the next. He has zero incidents with the law, not even a traffic ticket. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, Misconduct (Serious Offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided 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) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided 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; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance 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. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By violating the Army's policy not to abuse alcohol, the applicant compromised the special trust and confidence placed in an NCO. As an NCO, he had the duty to support and abide by the Army's alcohol abuse policies. By abusing alcohol, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incident of misconduct, and his post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his complete period of service and accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re- characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may 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. Although the applicant presented no behavioral health issues, a careful review of the available record indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues symptoms existed. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 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. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 April 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20170001165 4