1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 December 2018 b. Date Received: 29 January 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable conditions. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the discharge he received from his Brigade Commander was unjust and he believes it was a poor decision and went against the rest of his Chain of Command. His Company Commander recommended that he receive an honorable discharge and his Battalion Commander also recommended that he receive an honorable discharge. He doesn't believe it is fair for one person (BDE Commander) to make this decision on his behalf considering that the two Commanders in his chain of command said otherwise. The BDE Commander had never saw him before and was just reading his case off a sheet of paper and never took his case into consideration. His Company and Battalion Commander both recommended that he be retained in service and if he got discharged that he receive an honorable discharge. Instead the Brigade Commander made a decision out of spite and chose to discharge him and give him a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He was a modal Soldier and supervisor, he went on two deployments and rose to the rank of SSG in just five years as a Medic. With all that good he was done wrong by his BDE Commander, for in his policy letter on alcohol and for his circumstance, ti is up to the Battalion Commander for recommendation. For these reason he believes that he deserves an upgrade from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable because it was recommended by the first two commanders' in his COC. He also never was given a reason in person or writing why the Brigade Commander made this decision. In a records review conducted on 2 June 2021, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, and prior period of honorable service, as well as isolated incident with no damage property. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to Honorable and changed the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), with a corresponding separation code of JKN. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision (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: 30 December 2018 c. Separation Facts: Documents submitted by the applicant indicate; (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 August 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for physically controlling a vehicle while drunk on 25 May 2018 (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 3 August 2016 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 36 / HS Graduate / 110 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 68W30, Health Care Specialist / 5 years, 11 months, 23 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 8 January 2013 to 2 August 2016 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait (22 June 2014 to 26 February 2015 and 1 July 2016 to 18 February 2017) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-4, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NOPDR-2, ASR, OSR, GWOTEM-BSS g. Performance Ratings: Unable to read NCO Evaluation Reports in Record. h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 13 June 2018, which indicates the applicant was reprimanded for driving under the influence of alcohol on 25 May 2018, after submitting to an Intoxilyzer Test, which found him to have a breath alcohol content of 0.206 grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath. Police report which indicates the applicant was the subject of investigation for driving und the influence of alcohol or drugs (Off Post) and improper driving on the Lane Roadway (Off Post). Memorandum for Commander, dated 8 August 2018, signed by the intermediated commander which indicates the commander recommended that the applicant be retained and rehabilitative transferred to another unit as directed by the G-1/MPD. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; memorandum's from the unit and battalion commander's; and DD Form 214 for the period of service under review. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: NONE 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides 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), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides 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, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities' last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification 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. (2) 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. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board), dated 25 September 2019, sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember's date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10 United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) 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. (5) 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. e. 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." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. The board concurred on a basis from disciplinary records that the basis was an off-post DUI. The applicant's record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature. The DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant contends that the discharge he received from his Brigade Commander was unjust and he believes it was a poor decision and went against the rest of his Chain of Command. The applicant also contends he was a model Soldier and supervisor, he went on two deployments and rose to the rank of SSG in just five years as a Medic. The applicant further contends he also never was given a reason in person or writing why the Brigade Commander made this decision. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The applicant lacks a mitigating medical condition or circumstance. None were presented by the applicant and none are in the record. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? No. There is no service connected mitigation as defined in the Kurta memo. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No, the discharge is not mitigated by a condition or experience (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No, the discharge is not outweighed by a condition or experience b. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, it is unknown if these contentions have merit because the complete facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the service record. The available evidence indicates the basis for the applicant separation was for physically controlling a vehicle while drunk on 25 May 2018. c. The ADRB determined that the applicant's characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's service record. The applicant's length of service, combat contributions and overall quality made a GD discharge inequitable. The chain of command believed in rehabilitation. In absence of rehabilitation, a HD discharge is appropriate. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to honorable to correct inequities in the discharge due to matters of length and quality of service, as well as singular DUI during service. (2) The board voted to change the reason to JKN, reflective of the upgrade to Honorable. JKN also acknowledges some unmitigated misconduct occurred. (3) The corresponding SPD code will change to JKN, but the RE code will remain unchanged due to being proper for the new discharge characterization. 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 AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge BH - Behavioral Health CG - Company Grade Article 15 CID - Criminal Investigation Division ELS - Entry Level Status FG - Field Grade Article 15 GD - General Discharge HS - High School HD - Honorable Discharge IADT - Initial Active Duty Training MP - Military Police MST - Military Sexual Trauma NA - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Reentry SCM - Summary Court Martial SPCM - Special Court Martial SPD - Separation Program Designator TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA - Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20190001982 1