1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 February 2018 b. Date Received: 25 April 2018 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant, through counsel, requests a upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, a narrative reason change and a reentry (RE) code change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, although is still serving the country the best way possible, the applicant has goals to exceed at the job, but is unable to do so because of the undesirable discharge. The applicant loves this country, the Army, and wishes to remain close to the Army and veterans who have served. It is this same respect, motivation and devotion that drives the applicant's request and wishes to be counted among the Army's honorably discharged members, which the applicant considers to be an enormous part of life. The applicant was an exceptional Soldier, who had only one blemish on an otherwise stellar record. The applicant was a very young when this incident happened. The applicant had only recently been able to legally drink alcohol and did not know the effect it would have. The applicant should have been offered a chance to remain in the Army, but the applicant was not given a proper opportunity to mitigate or correct these mistakes/behavior, and instead was administratively separated. No consideration was given to the fact that the applicant was exhibiting signs of mental distress and PTSD, before the incident that caused the discharge. The Secretary of Defense guidance to the Military Department Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records regarding under other than honorable conditions discharge upgrade requests by veterans claiming PTSD, specifically applies to the applicant's case. Since discharge, the applicant has completely changed. The applicant has completely quit drinking, started a new career, and sought out volunteer work. The applicant still wants to serve the country in any way possible. However, the applicant cannot do so with the current discharge. The applicant has been successful since discharge, obtaining various different licenses, awards, and recognitions. In 2016, the applicant was accepted into the unlicensed apprentice program at the Seafarers International Union, which is a two year school, which teaches students about seamanship, yet declined this offer to stay with the current company, Compass Marine Propulsions as the Lead Deckhand. The applicant has achieved a Certificate in Welding as well. The applicant has also received stellar letters of recommendation to attest to excellent character and integrity. The applicant volunteers personal time at Hospice for Children as well. 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 the applicant was followed by ASAP and Behavioral Health while on active duty, but received no diagnoses. The applicant is 80% service-connected; 70% for PTSD from the VA. In summary, the applicant had a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 28 January 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, post-service accomplishments, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD) 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 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 29 May 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 April 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 9 March 2013, he was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol; and, On 9 March 2013, he violated a lawful general order to wit: Quick Reaction Force (QRF) alcohol consumption policy, dated 7 January 2013, by wrongfully having more than two alcoholic drinks during a 24 hour period while assigned to QRF duty. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 24 April 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 May 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 26 May 2010 / 4 years, 21 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 89 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 3 years, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska, SWA / Afghanistan (21 April 2011 - 22 April 2012) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, GWTOSM, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Fourth Judicial District at , Misdemeanor Complaint, dated 9 March 2013, reflects the applicant was charged with: Driving While Under the Influence of an Alcoholic Beverage, Intoxicating Liquor, Inhalant, or Any Controlled Substance. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 13 March 2013, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. CG Article 15, dated 25 March 2013, for violating a lawful General Order, to wit: Quick Reaction Force Alcohol Consumption Policy, by wrongfully having more than two alcoholic drinks during a 24 hour period while assigned to QRF duty (9 March 2013). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3; forfeiture of $443 pay (suspended); extra duty and restriction for 14 days; and, an oral reprimand. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 4 April 2013, for driving under the influence of alcohol, on 9 March 2013. A police officer initiated a traffic stop after observing the applicant's vehicle almost strike his patrol car, back out of a pull in only parking spot, and fail to maintain its lane. The applicant subsequently failed the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests and provided a breath sample resulting in a Breath Alcohol Content (BrAC) of .190 percent. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of his VA medical treatment records, which reflects the applicant was treated for Anxiety; Chronic Headache Disorder; Depression; and, Posttraumatic stress disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with allied legal brief and all listed enclosures. The applicant provided a second legal brief, which included an additional certificate, a biography and family photographs. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant, states he has completely quit drinking, started a new career, and sought out volunteer work. The applicant obtained various different licenses, awards, and recognitions. The applicant has also received stellar letters of recommendation to attest to his excellent character and integrity. The applicant volunteers his time at Hospice for Children as well. 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 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, through counsel, requests a upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, a narrative reason change and a reentry (RE) code 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 applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ"." 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 desires an RE code change. 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 applicant contends the Veterans Administration has treated him for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which was undiagnosed during his service, but affected his behavior and led to his discharge. 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. The record shows that on 13 March 2013, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the 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 Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization 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. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good conduct after leaving the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements were not 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 government regularity. 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 document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): None b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 28 January 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, to include combat service, post-service accomplishments, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. post-service diagnosis of PTSD) 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. 11. 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 AR20180006772 6