1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 16 April 2019 b. Date Received: 19 April 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 a change of his reentry eligibility (RE) code from 4 to a 3 or what he needs to reenlist. It should be noted; the applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge the Army Discharge Review Board will consider the applicant for a possible upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he has matured and grown up a lot since the incident leading to his discharge and if given a second chance, he will cherish his Army Career. In a records review conducted on 16 July 2021, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined the reenlistment code (RE) warranted clemency based on the applicant's length and quality of service to include combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (post- service diagnosis of PTSD). 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: Alcohol / Drug Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200 / Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 31 March 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 March 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: for being a ASAP failure (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 10 March 2015, the applicant waived his right to legal counsel (5) Administrative Separation Board: None (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 10 March 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 November 2012 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 115 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 94S10, Patriot System Repairer / 2 years, 4 months, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Memorandum for Record, dated 18 October 2014, reference Probable Cause. The memorandum indicates the applicant showed signs of alcohol consumption with flushed face, red eyes, irritability, slurred speech and alcohol smell on 18 October 2014. Due to the circumstances listed, the unit commander ordered the applicant to be tested for alcohol consumption to ensure command referral compliance in the ASAP program, in order to ensure good order and discipline. FG Article 15, dated 18 November 2014, for resisting apprehension by Staff Sergeant B.T.J., and Air Force Security Forces Member, by pushing away from the Staff Sergeant and trying to walk away during escort to Osan Main Gate on 1 September 2014, wrongfully using provoking words, to wit; "you with the fucking bandana on, fuck you" or words to that effect towards Technical Sergeant J.J.T., US Air Force on 1 September 2014, wrongfully using provoking words, to wit; "I am going to fuck kill you, I will piss all over you' or words to that effect toward First Lieutenant C.D.O., US Air Force, on 1 September 2004, assault on Staff Sergeant B.T.J., US Air Force, by spitting on and around his face multiple times on 1 September 2014, unlawfully striking Technical Sergeant J.J.T, US Air Force, on the head with his foot, 1 September 2014, and being drunk and disorderly in the Songtan Entertainment District which conduct was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces on 1 September 2014. The punishment consisted of reduction toe E-1, forfeiture of a half months pay for two months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Memorandum for Record, dated 27 February 2015, which makes reference to the applicant's Army Substance Abuse Program Rehabilitation Failure. The applicant began his treatment on 1 October 2014 after stating agreement, both verbally and in writing, that he was not allowed to consume alcohol while enrolled in the treatment program. On 18 October 2014 he again consumed alcohol appearing at a recall formation with a BAC of 0.116 percent. After that time command reported concerns about his continued use of alcohol and command had felt that his progress in the Army Substance Abuse program had been below satisfactory. It was a clinical determination that IAW AR600-85 that the applicant was a Rehabilitation Failure. Counseling statement for act of misconduct / duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and DA Form 7096 (ASAP Outpatient Aftercare Plan) 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 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 Service-member discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Service-member'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) Paragraph 3-7c states Under other-than-honorable-conditions discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable and it may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial based on certain circumstances or patterns of behavior or acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. (5) 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. (6) Paragraph 9-4, stipulates the service of Soldiers discharged under this section will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions unless the Soldier is in entry-level status and an uncharacterized description of service is required. An honorable discharge is mandated in any case in which the Government initially introduces into the final discharge process limited use evidence as defined by AR 600-85, paragraph 6-4. 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 "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. f. 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." 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 requests a change of his reentry eligibility (RE) code from 4 to a 3 or what he needs to reenlist. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. However, as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge the Army Discharge Review Board will consider the applicant for a possible upgrade to honorable. The evidence of record indicates that on or about 27 February 2015, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure in the Substance Abuse Program. 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 the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems. The evidence of record shows 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 chapter is "Alcohol 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 appropriate RE code is 4. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. At the time of discharge, the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 4. An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is not eligible to reenlist. 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 Board's BH Doctor reviewed all available medical records and found no BH diagnoses on the applicant. The applicant provided no documents that, when applying liberal consideration, convinced the Board of a possible mitigating BH condition. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? (N/A) (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? (N/A) (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? (N/A) b. The applicant contends a desire to reenter service, accepted basis for separation, and requests a RE code change only. The Board majority accepted the reasoning and voted the requested relief. c. The Board determined ASAP failure was proper and equitable, but due to a desire to reenter service approved an RE code upgrade to 3. Applicant would still need to obtain required waivers. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The board voted not to change the applicant's characterization of service because ASAP failure was proper and equitable and there were no mitigating factors to consider. (2) The board voted not to change the reason because ASAP failure was appropriate. (3) The Board did vote to upgrade the RE-code to 3, to enable applicant to reenter service upon receipt of appropriate waivers, if possible. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes 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 / RE-3 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 AR20190006394 1