1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 16 May 2016 b. Date Received: 16 May 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one incident in his career. Prior to this episode in his career, he had received many awards for outstanding service. During his deployment to Iraq, he received a general officer letter commendation for outstanding courage and leadership during a complex attack on his unit. After returning from his second combat deployment, the incident that led to his discharge occurred. During his deployments he routinely engaged in firefights with the enemy and lost friends. He suffered as he coped with their loss. He suffered from issues and became embarrassed as he believed it was a sign of weakness. Later, these issues were identified as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). At the time he was reclassified into recruiting duty, his wife asked him for a divorce and wanted custody of their daughter. His chain of command did not seem to understand his situation, which resulted in him being ordered into the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP). He believes, had his chain of command recognized he was suffering from PTSD, he would have received the appropriate support to cope with situation. Since his discharge, he was diagnosed with PTSD and receives disability compensation from the VA. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 10 February 2016, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Per the Board's medical officer, based on the information available at the time, the applicant had a behavioral health condition which is mitigating for the misconduct which led to the applicant's discharge from the Army. The applicant has been found 50 percent service-connected for PTSD by the VA. His military medical records indicate symptoms consistent with PTSD. PTSD is often associated with the use of substances to self-medicate. As such, there is likely a nexus between the applicant's PTSD and the offenses which led to his separation from the Army, to wit: alcohol dependence and the refusal to participate in medical treatment for alcohol dependence. Both the military and the VA electronic medical records were reviewed. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 November 2016, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service, the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. capricious actions of the command, in-service diagnosis of OBH, and service-connected PTSD diagnosis), personal testimony, and his post-service accomplishments. Therefore, the board directed the issue of a new DD Form 214 changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 5-3, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 3. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200, Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-4 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 1 February 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 December 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 28 June 2012, the applicant was command-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) due to a diagnosis of alcohol dependence. On 16 July 2012, he declined the recommendation for treatment and refused to participate in the recommended level III, residential treatment with 12 months of continuing care. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 December 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: Conditionally waived (NIF) (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 18 January 2013 / Honorable 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 March 2012 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / GED / 118 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B2P, Infantryman / 6 years, 6 months, 15 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 17 August 2006 to 1 February 2010 / HD RA, 2 February 2010 to 5 March 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA, Alaska / Afghanistan (20 October 2010 to 28 July 2011), Iraq (19 September 2008 to 9 September 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM, ACM-2CS, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL, MUC, VUA, CIB g. Performance Ratings: RA, 4 June 2012 through 1 February 2013 / Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for being command-referred into ASAP for alcohol dependence; being recommended to attend a level III residential treatment with 12-months of continuing care; declining the recommendation for treatment; being determined to be an ASAP rehabilitation failure; not being recommended for promotion; being removed from recruiting duty; missing PT formation; and refusing to attend a command-directed ASAP counseling. Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment, indicates the applicant was command-referred for admitting smoking marijuana to cope with stress. Treatment Summary (memorandum): indicates the applicant was command-referred for meeting the criteria for a diagnosis of alcohol dependence. Upon being recommended for a residential treatment, the applicant declined. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical History, dated 16 October 2012, indicates the applicant noted an IED injury with mild concussion and behavioral health issues with PTSD counseling. The applicant provided a copy of his VA disability rating decision, dated 12 March 2014, which reflects the applicant was rated 50 percent disability for PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with documents listed in block 8 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with his application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for alcohol or drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. Army policy states that an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service. However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process. 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 "JPD" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JPD" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members’ discharges. “Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre-existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service.” “Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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 a narrative reason change. The applicant’s record of service, the issues and documents 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. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The evidence of record indicates on 20 August 2012, the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) in consultation with the unit commander, declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure because the applicant declined the recommendation for residential treatment and 12 months of continuing care. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed because his chain of command failed to recognize he had PTSD. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of chapter 9, AR 635-200 with an honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is “Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure,” and the separation code is “JPD.” Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that 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 further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant contends that he had good service which included two combat tours. The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends that he was having family issues that in part, affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends the Veterans Administration has granted him a service connected disability for PTSD. However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. It appears the applicant’s chain of command determined that although he was suffering from PTSD, he knew the difference between what was right and wrong. 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. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentins. b. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 7 November 2016, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the narrative reason for the applicant's separation is inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service, to include his combat service, the circumstances surrounding his discharge (i.e. capricious actions of the command, in-service diagnosis of OBH, and service-connected PTSD diagnosis), personal testimony, and his post-service accomplishments. Therefore, the board directed the issue of a new DD Form 214 changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 5-3, and the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, with a corresponding separation code to JFF, and a change to the reentry eligibility (RE) code to 3. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority d. Change SPD / RE Code to: JFF, AR 635-200, Chapter 5-3 / RE-Code 3 e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board 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 AR20160009325 6