1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 10 May 2016 b. Date Received: 11 May 2016 c. Counsel: None d. Previous Records Review: 19 June 2013, AR20130001317 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, he was wrongfully discharged. An upgrade would allow him to serve in the Army, again, as his continued service is very important to him. Supporting documentary evidence rendered by his superior officers would confirm his good service while in support of OEF. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case file, AHLTA and JLV were reviewed. AHLTA notes indicate applicant was diagnosed with the following BH conditions while on active duty: Alcohol Dependence. Applicant's first contact with BH and ASAP was after incident with intoxication and possession of a loaded weapon. Records indicate he was cooperative with attending ASAP and BH. Applicant indicated in records that he was very intoxicated at time of incident. He denied having any suicidal or homicidal ideation. JLV indicates he is 50% service connected for PTSD. He is on multiple medications and actively involved in treatment. Based on the available information, he has a mitigating condition, PTSD, for the offense of being intoxicated. As PTSD is associated with use of alcohol to self-medicate, there is a nexus between his PTSD and the offense of being intoxicated. PTSD is not considered mitigating for the offense of carrying a loaded weapon. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 30 October 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service and behavioral health issues and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) and the separation code to JKN. The board determined the characterization of service was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (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: 26 October 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 13 September 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: On 18 August 2012, the applicant was arrested by civilian authorities for carrying a loaded weapon while drunk with a BAC of .249 percent. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 19 September 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: Undated / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 20 July 2012 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 6 months, 7 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (20 April 2010 to 19 July 2012) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska, SWA / Afghanistan (10 May 2011 to 28 April 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AAM; NDSM; ACM-2CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR; NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Civilian Court document, dated 18 August 2012, shows a charge of "Court 1:" misconduct involving weapons in the fourth degree, and further described that on 17 August 2012, the applicant did unlawfully possess on his person a firearm when his "physical or mental condition was impaired as a result of the introduction of an intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance into [his] body," and that "[a]ll of which is a class A misdemeanor offense ... ." Negative counseling statements for being arrested for weapons and alcohol-related incident, and making false official statements to an NCO, a CSM. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 28 August 2012, indicates the applicant was diagnosed with "AXIS 1" for "Alcohol Abuse," and that the applicant was currently being seen by ASAP. Trial Defense Service memorandum, dated 26 September 2012, rendered by defense counsel, stated in effect, that the separation action was improper because the offense was not a serious misconduct, and that there was no closely related offenses under the MCM. Civilian counsel letter, dated 28 September 2012, indicated the court in agreement with the applicant agreed to dismiss all charges contingent upon the applicant performing 80 hours of community work service over a three-month period, and upon completion, the state would file a dismissal of the charges, which as a resolution, would allow the applicant to continue to serve. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 10 May 2016; trial defense service letter, dated 26 September 2012; counsel letter, dated 28 September 2012; civilian court, Notice of Dismissal, dated 29 October 2012; page one of commander's report memorandum, undated; applicant's self-authored statements presenting issues and reasons for wanting to stay in the Army, dated 25 September 2012; memorandum for record, dated 7 September 2012, by group deputy commander; memorandum for record, dated 11 September 2012, by brigade air defense coordinator; memorandum for record, dated 18 September 2012, by platoon leader; memorandum for record, dated 20 September 2012, by platoon sergeant; and memorandum for record, dated 19 September 2012, by team leader. Additional Evidence: letter of support, dated 5 October 2017. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record further 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 incident of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and marred the quality of his service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends the discharge was improper. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge and to change the narrative reason for his discharge. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance and character. However, the persons providing the character reference and supporting statements were in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of regularity. Regarding the applicant's documentary evidence showing that the civilian charge against him was dismissed after he left the Army, on 29 October 2012. This action is a procedural step which is part of a normal process, when an alternative forum is chosen. In this case, because of an agreement between the civilian court and the applicant that contingent upon completing an 80-hour community service, the charge would be dismissed. The applicant requests to change the reason for his separation; however, the narrative reason for his separation is governed by specific directives. The narrative reason specified by AR 635- 5-1 for a discharge under Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is JKQ. 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 further expressed a desire to rejoin the Service. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on AR 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to these incidents, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. 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 testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents. b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 30 October 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's quality of service, to include combat service, a prior period of honorable service and behavioral health issues and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief by changing the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) and the separation code to JKN. The board determined the characterization of service was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 11. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12a d. Change SPD / RE Code to: Change SPD to JKN / No Change to RE code e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade 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 AR20160009372 1