1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 August 2017 b. Date Received: 25 August 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, would like an upgrade of discharge for the purpose of being able to rejoin the Army. The applicant was discharged with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) for alcohol rehabilitation failure (chapter 9). Recently the applicant has decided to rejoin the United States Army to serve the country the correct way. When the applicant first joined the Army, the applicant was very immature and young minded at the time, not realizing one's full potential and the great opportunity that the applicant had with the military. At the time, the applicant didn't realize the impact that the insubordination would cause. Since discharge, the applicant has not had any alcohol related incidents or any other incident in the past few years. The applicant has grown, matured, and feels one has a clear and level head on one's shoulders. The applicant realizes that the poor decision making may have cost the one and only chance of serving in the military and making a career for oneself, which the applicant always dreamed of doing. Since discharge from the military, the applicant has been working construction with which the applicant is currently employed. The applicant enjoys where the applicant is working and is grateful for the opportunities that have been given with this company, but it doesn't give the applicant the same fulfillment that the applicant had in the military. The applicant would greatly appreciate a second opportunity and understands one may not deserve it, the applicant would be forever grateful. The applicant asks that the shortcomings be looked past, and be given a second chance. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder with anxiety/with depressed mood, Alcohol Abuse, Alcohol Dependence, and PTSD. The VA has diagnosed the applicant with Alcohol Dependence and PTSD related to childhood. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnosis is not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 October 2019, 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: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200 / Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 22 May 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 15 January 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: being deemed an Army Substance Abuse Program failure and in addition, as it pertains to characterization of service, the applicant was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol on two separate occasions, disrespected a noncommissioned officer, and failed to report to his place of duty on diverse occasions. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 21 January 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 March 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) It should be noted that the separation authority made his decision after reviewing the separation packet and the completed Medical Evaluation Board and in accordance with 635- 200, paragraph 1-33(c), fine that the disability was not the cause, or substantial contributing cause, or the misconduct committed and no other circumstances warrant disability processing instead of alternate administrative separation. He directed that the case not be processed through medical disability channels. He directed that the applicant be separated from the United States Army prior to the expiration of his term of service, under the provisions of AR 635- 200, Chapter 9. 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 January 2012 / 3 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 91 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 3 years, 3 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 31 July 2013, for violation of Article 86, UCMJ x3, and violation of Article 91, UCMJ. The punishment consisted of reduction to E2, and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Military Police Report, dated 16 September 2014, indicates the applicant was the subject of investigation for drunken driving General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 20 October 2014, which indicates the applicant was reprimanded for driving under the influence of alcohol at Joint Base Elmendorf- Richardson, Alaska, on 30 August 2014, with a Standardized Field Sobriety Test sample of .155 percent. Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES), dated 6 October 2014. Summary of Rehabilitation Efforts, dated 29 October 2014. FG Article 14, dated 4 December 2014, for violation of Article 111, UCMJ. The punishment consisted of reduction to E1, forfeiture of $765 pay per month for two months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Medical Evaluation Board Proceedings, dated 29 December 2014, showing the applicant was diagnosed with bilateral lower extremities compartment syndrome status post fasciotomies with residuals persistent exertional compartment syndrome. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: MEB Narrative Summary, noted that the applicant had medical conditions with PTSD, adjustment disorder, depression, anxiety, and alcohol use disorder, moderate. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the 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. 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 record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record indicates that on 29 September 2014, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure in the Substance Abuse Program. The applicant was enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) and was aware of the consequences of any action which would demonstrate any inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program. As a result of the applicant's actions and after consultation with the drug and alcohol abuse counselor, the command declared the Soldier a rehabilitation failure. The evidence of record establishes the fact the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems. 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. The applicant contends that when he first joined the Army he was very immature and young minded at the time, not realizing his full potential and the great opportunity that he had with the military. At the time he didn't realize the impact that his insubordination would cause. Since his discharge he has not had any alcohol related incidence or any other incidence. In the past few years he has grown and matured, and he feels he has a clear and level head on his shoulders. He realize that his poor decision making may have cost him his one and only chance serving in the military and making a career for himself, which he always dreamed of doing. Since his discharge from the military he has been working construction with which he is currently employed. He enjoys where he is working and is grateful for the opportunities he has been given with this company, but it doesn't give him the same fulfillment that he had in the military. He would greatly appreciate a second opportunity that he understands he may not deserve but would be forever grateful for. He ask that his shortcomings be looked past, and he be given a second chance. The applicant contentions and post service accomplishments were noted. However, although he claims he was young and immature at the time of 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. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to rejoin the Army. However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 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. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 October 2019, 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 AR20170012916 1