1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 February 2017 b. Date Received: 13 March 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, she was injured during a combat night jump in September 2013. She was on profile into her discharge date. She was also a young 23-year- old Soldier, who received a DUI in November 2013. Following her discharge, she has been employed full time. She has also started going to college as a full-time student. She was assigned 50 percent disability, and if not for her DUI, she would have been referred to a medical evaluation board. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case files, AHLTA and JLV were reviewed. AHLTA contains several ASAP notes and one Psychology note (applicant's separation mental status evaluation). She has only one BH diagnosis in AHLTA-Alcohol Abuse. VA records indicate she is 50% SC, 10% of which is for Dysthymia. Based on the available information, she does not have a mitigating BH disorder. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 29 June 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of OBH), post service accomplishments, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (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: 20 March 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 February 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: On 1 December 2013, she was pulled over for failing to maintain the limits of her lane and for having an expired vehicle registration. When the police officer approached her vehicle, he detected an odor of alcohol emitting from her person. A field sobriety test was conducted, which warranted further action. She was transported to the Fort Bragg Law Enforcement Center and administered an "INTOX EC/IR II Test resulting in a .13 percent BAC. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 11 February 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 February 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 November 2012 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / 13 years / 106 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 31B1P, Military Police / 1 year, 4 months, 8days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; GWOTSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 14 January 2014, indicates the applicant was reprimanded for being arrested for driving while impaired after being stopped for failing to maintain her lane. Discharge Orders i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Applicant for the Review of Discharge), dated 28 February 2017. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, in effect, since her discharge, she has been employed full time, and she has also started going to college as a full-time student. 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 her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service and the issues submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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 the incident of misconduct, the applicant compromised the special trust and confidence placed in a Soldier. She knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of her service below that meriting an honorable discharge. 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 she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends she was injured on a combat jump and was on profile, and she believes she would have been referred to the medical evaluation board. However, the service record contains no evidence of any medical conditions and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Perhaps also an indication that she should have been medically discharged. However, Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates that commanders will not take action to separate Soldiers for a medical condition solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct. The applicant contends that she was young when she had a DUI, which led to her discharge. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. In consideration of the applicant's post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that her accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of her 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 29 June 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of OBH), post service accomplishments, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20170004142 1