1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 June 2018 b. Date Received: 10 August 2018 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant, through counsel, requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, turned to alcohol only as a method of self-medicating a Major Depressive Disorder that the applicant developed during service. Instead of taking the necessary steps of alcohol invention that the Army policies dictate, however, the command left the applicant's alcoholism untreated to eventually result in the applicant's alcohol- related incident that prompted the discharge. Since discharge, the applicant has strived to be a productive member of the household and community. The applicant's discharge was both inequitable and improper. The command failed to take into consideration mitigating factors and the command's arbitrary and capricious acts of failing to give the applicant the necessary treatment were not consistent with Army regulations. When evaluating the totality of circumstances that led to the applicant's discharge from the Army, the ADRB agreed that equity and propriety require upgrading the discharge from General (Under Honorable Conditions) to Honorable, and changing the narrative reason for separation from "Misconduct" to "Secretarial Authority." Since discharge, the applicant graduated from Beach State University in California with a Bachelors in Interpersonal and Organizational Communications with a cumulative GPA over 3.6. During the time at Long Beach State, the applicant proudly worked in the Veterans Services Office on Campus for a few semesters and helped many veterans and their dependents with enrollment procedures into the University. After graduating with a Bachelor's degree, the applicant was accepted to the Masters in Social Work Program at both USC and Long Beach State University in 2016. The applicant had to put that chapter of life on hold because of being offered a job with the Social Security Administration after earning an internship through the Veterans Affairs Vocational Rehabilitation Program. The applicant has been with the Social Security Administration since December 2015 and currently holds the title of Claims Specialist. The applicant is grateful for this job and grateful for the opportunities the Army and the Veterans Administration has offered. The applicant's contentions are further detailed in an allied legal brief and self-authored statement. 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 Alcohol Abuse, Alcohol Intoxication, and Insomnia due to Stress. The applicant is 100% service-connected for Major Depressive Disorder. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with Adjustment Disorder with anxiety, Depressive Mood Disorder, and Obstructive Sleep Apnea. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 August 2019, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH), post-service accomplishments, a prior period of honorable service, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (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: 23 July 2008 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 17 June 2008 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He received an event oriented counseling statement on 5 September 2007, for his second offense of being arrested for Driving while Intoxicated. He received a Memorandum of Reprimand on 12 May 2007, from Fort Hood Commander, MG H, for driving an automobile while intoxicated. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 18 June 2008 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 July 2008 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 April 2006 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist / 4 years, 2 months, 21 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 3 May 2004 - 6 April 2006 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 12 May 2007, for driving an automobile while intoxicated. At 2355 hours on 9 December 2006, a Texas Department of Public Safety Trooper conducted a traffic stop on a vehicle that was traveling above the speed limit. At the stop, the Trooper noted that the applicant was the driver. The applicant appeared drowsy, his eyes were glossy, and he swayed a little while walking. A Field Sobriety Test was administered, which he failed. The applicant was arrested and taken to the Killeen City Jail where he was administered an intoxilyzer. The intoxilyzer registered a 0.134 breath alcohol content, above the legal limit of 0.08 as set forth in the Texas Penal Code § 49.04. Killeen Police Department Police Report, dated 31 August 2007, reflects the applicant was arrested for Driving While Intoxicated, Subsequent. Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment form, dated 5 September 2007, reflects the applicant self-referred in the ASAP. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 12 September 2007, for refusing to take a Breath Alcohol Content Test. At 0250 hours on 31 August 2007, he was stopped by a Killeen Police Department Officer for driving while intoxicated. He then refused to submit to a Breath Alcohol Content Test and refused to provide a blood specimen for the purpose of measuring his blood alcohol content. Each refusal is grounds for reprimand under AR 190-5, Motor Vehicle Traffic Supervision, 22 May 2006, paragraph 2-7a(2). Mental Status Evaluation, dated 7 January 2008, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant was mentally responsible with clear a thinking process. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: ASAP Outpatient Discharge Summary, dated 12 December 2007, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with: Alcohol Abuse. The applicant provided a copy of his VA disability verification letter, dated 25 April 2013, which reflects the applicant was rated 100 percent disability for major depressive disorder, alcohol dependence in sustained full remission (formerly depression). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; self-authored statement; legal brief with all listed exhibits. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has earned his Bachelor's Degree and has obtained employment. 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). 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 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 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 contends the VA has granted him a service connected disability for Major Depressive 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 reflects that on 25 April 2013, 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's separation packet contains an Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) enrollment form, which indicates the applicant "Self" referred to the program. However, it appears the document was erroneously marked "Self" instead of "Command" referred. The same form reflects the applicant's immediate supervisor signed the form on 5 September 2007. Evidence of the record reflects the supervisor informed the applicant of his intent to recommend that he be Command referred to the ASAP, in a counseling dated 5 September 2007. The applicant's unit commander also signed the applicant's referral to ASAP on 10 September 2007. Therefore, 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 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 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 third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance; 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 August 2019, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. in-service diagnosis of OBH), post-service accomplishments, a prior period of honorable service, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable 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 AR20180012740 1