1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 3 May 2019 b. Date Received: 9 May 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, the current characterization of service is unfair, due to the circumstances presented in a self-authored statement. The applicant has never received an Article 15 in the 19 months with the unit. The applicant never got in any trouble until returning from deployment. The applicant self-enrolled in ASAP; however, was unable make the treatment appointments due to being directed to attend school at Fort Benning. The applicant realizes and acknowledges being an ASAP failure due to the DUI incident, and apologizes for the mistake the applicant made. Counseling statements from the squad leaders reflect hard work, APFT and weapons qualifications, and awards. The applicant also attended airborne training for the unit. The applicant deployed twice to Iraq; wherein, the applicant missed four Christmas and Thanksgiving holidays (three in Iraq and one locally). The applicant was prevented from going home due to the DUI, while others who were pending UCMJ actions, were allowed to go home. The applicant could have been provided another chance, because the applicant was unable to attend ASAP treatment for two months. The applicant asserts in the statement supporting the claim that the service should be considered honorable, since the applicant was self-medicating with alcohol for PTSD. 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 and Alcohol Dependence. The applicant s 80% service-connected from the VA. 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 17 April 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was improper. The record shows the government introduced into the discharge packet evidence of the applicant's self-referral to ADACP as part of the applicant's separation process. Use of this information mandates award of an honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, 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: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200, Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (Note the DD Form 214 incorrectly reflects a UOTH. The applicant was approved for General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.) b. Date of Discharge: 17 February 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 January 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed that it had been determined he was an Army Substance Abuse Program failure (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 27 January 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: In an undated memorandum / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 15 November 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 87 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M1P, Motor Transport Operator / 4 years, 11 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA (28 February 2006 to 14 November 2008) / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (5 November 2007 to 19 January 2009), (24 August 2009 to 30 July 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM-2; AGCM; NDSM; ICM-2CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR-2; MUC g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Counseling statement for being involved in a DUI incident; his actions violating Article 92, UCMJ, for failing to obey an order; and violating Article 111, UCMJ, for drunken or reckless operation of a vehicle. Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment indicates the applicant self-enrolled in ASAP on 19 August 2010 (at pages 24-25 of separation file). General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand and its associated documents, dated 9 December 2010, indicates the applicant was reprimanded for driving while impaired on 4 December 2010. DA Form 4466 (Patient Progress Report (PPR)), dated 21 January 2011, indicates the applicant was released from the Army Substance Abuse Program. In the "Progress Evaluation" section, the counselor's assessment of progress reflected "Good," and recommended termination of treatment and retain on active duty; however, the commander's assessment of satisfactory progress, reflected a decision to terminate treatment and separate due to failure. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Applicant's documentary evidence: Medical record entitled "After Visit Summary," dated 8 February 2019, indicates the applicant being treated for "Moderate episode of recurrent major depressive disorder" and "PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder." 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 3 May 2019, with applicant-authored statement; VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim), dated 3 May 2019; medical record entitled "After Visit Summary," dated 8 February 2019, with Results and Medication List. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JPD" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. 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 available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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 that the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems during outpatient ASAP treatment with an emphasis on relapse prevention. Upon further examining the applicant's military records, and the issues and documents submitted with the application, the record further confirms that the government introduced documents into the discharge process revealing the applicant had self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for substance abuse. This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85. Use of this information mandates award of an honorable characterization of service. The applicant's contentions regarding his behavioral health issues which involved having to self- medicate with alcohol due to suffering from PTSD, were carefully considered. A careful review of the applicant's documentary evidence indicates the applicant's Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder issues symptoms existed, and the applicant contends they were contributing factors that led to his misconduct. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to his misconduct, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because his school attendance prevented him from completing his ASAP treatment. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incident of misconduct, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant a change to the reason for his discharge. Although the records show that the proper discharge and separation procedures were not followed in this case, insofar as it applies to the characterization of discharge, the reason for 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 17 April 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was improper. The record shows the government introduced into the discharge packet evidence of the applicant's self-referral to ADACP as part of the applicant's separation process. Use of this information mandates award of an honorable characterization of service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, 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 AR20190006207 1