1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 23 May 2018 b. Date Received: 29 May 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, at the time of his service, he was suffering from anxiety, depression, alcoholism and addiction. He was undiagnosed and unaware of the extent of his affliction, which lead to his discharge. The applicant states, when he was not overwhelmed with symptoms, he was a model Soldier. The applicant was not diagnosed and did not start treatment until after disciplinary action had started. Once the applicant was diagnosed, he took every option given to him and worked diligently. Since getting his disease under control, he has lead a productive charitable life. The applicant states, in his unit, drinking was encouraged and a rite of passage, which seemed normal to all his fellow Soldiers. The drinking was occurred so often, it became hard for them to identify a problem. The applicant's schedule in an infantry unit, which was preparing for a deployment, made it hard for him to address mental health issues. Once he was offered the opportunity for treatment, he was able to address his disease. The applicant began teaching religious education to students of other service members on post and volunteered almost every remaining weekend at Soldiers Against Drunk Driving, where he would help intoxicated Soldiers get home safely. 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 disturbance of emotions; Alcohol Abuse; Alcohol Dependence; Anxiety Disorder NOS; Cannabis Dependence; Nicotine Dependence; Opioid Dependence; Cocaine Dependence. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Opioid Dependence. The applicant is 90% service connected for non-BH conditions. In summary, the applicant does not have a BH diagnosis that is mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 November 2020, and by a 3-2 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: 10 September 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 19 July 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant was enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program for alcohol abuse on 27 July 2011. The applicant had failed to demonstrate commitment to his treatment for alcohol abuse and have been designated as an alcohol rehabilitation failure by the rehabilitative team and his Commander. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 23 July 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 31 July 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 October 2009 / 6 years, 21 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 24 / HS Graduate / 118 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 3 years, 2 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Alaska / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Statement of Progress (memo), dated 23 November 2011, reflects the applicant was referred to Fort Richardson's Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) on 27 July 2011, following a BAT verified at a 0.104 during the duty day. The applicant completed an in-depth alcohol and drug assessment on 27 July 2011, and was clinically confirmed with diagnoses of Opioid Dependence, Cannabis Dependence and Alcohol Abuse. The rehabilitation team meeting (RTM) was held on 12 September 2011, following training in Louisiana, at which time the applicant was enrolled in treatment and agreed to comply with all treatment requirements. The applicant acknowledged the expectation of abstinence that is required of all ASAP enrollments. The applicant's treatment plan included abstinence from alcohol and all mood altering substances, the 14-hour Prime for Life, educational alcohol and drug series, weekly group sessions, bi-weekly individual counseling sessions, 3 Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings a week, a breathalyzer test (BAT) 5 times a week, and a Urinalysis (UA) test 2 times a week. The applicant completed Prime for Life on 17- 18 September 2011, 7 weekly group sessions, 6 weekly individual sessions and multiple AA meetings. On 21 November 2011, the applicant became intoxicated, pulled a fire alarm and was taken to CID. The applicant had failed to demonstrate abstinence, the motivation necessary to learn alternative coping skills and strategies and apply what was learned in individual and group sessions to his life. The applicant had also failed to demonstrate a willingness to rehabilitate. Patient Progress Report, dated 23 November 2011, reflects the applicant was released from the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP). The applicant's in-progress evaluation was poor and the counselor recommended terminating treatment and separation. The unit commander's appraisal of the applicant's performance was unsatisfactory. The reason for separation from the ASAP programs was "Separation/Termination as Alcohol/Drug Abuse Rehab Failure". FG Article 15, dated 17 October 2011, for being drunk on duty (20 June 2011). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $822 pay per month for two months (suspended); and, extra duty and restriction for 45 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 19 January 2012, 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. The applicant was diagnosed with: Anxiety Disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; Request from Sponsor (memo); two Providence Behavioral Health letters; two character letters. 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. 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. 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 and a narrative reason change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record indicates that on 23 November 2011, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure. The applicant had failed to demonstrate abstinence, the motivation necessary to learn alternative coping skills and strategies and apply what was learned in individual and group sessions to his life. The applicant had also failed to demonstrate a willingness to rehabilitate. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "alcohol / drug 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 he was suffering from undiagnosed anxiety, depression, alcoholism and addiction, which affected his behavior and led to his discharge. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Anxiety Disorder; 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 19 January 2012, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation, which indicates he was mentally responsible 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. 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 discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 November 2020, and by a 3-2 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 / 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 AR20180008849 3