1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 June 2019 b. Date Received: 1 July 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 did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade. The Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28, which stipulates 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 applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, a charge of wrongful use of marijuana is showing up on his background check and preventing him from gaining employment. In a records review conducted on 14 July 2021, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: d. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) e. Date of Discharge: 15 April 2016 f. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 April 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 23 March 2015, he received a Field Grade Article 15 for leaving military installation without authorization, wrongfully consuming alcohol off installation, violating installation instructions by going off installation without a battle buddy/liberty, failing to return to installation by 2300 hours, behaving in a drunk and disorderly manner (violation of Article 134 UCMJ), and, attempting to steal a cell phone and wallet from a local patron of a bar off installation (violation of Article 80 UCMJ). On 26 January 2016 he received a permanently filed General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand for driving while intoxicated. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 4 April 2016, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 7 April 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 February 2013 / 3 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / 99 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 14T10, Patriot Operator Maintenance / 3 years, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Bahrain (11 October 2014 - 11 October 2015) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, OCSM, NDSM, GWOTEM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Texas Highway Patrol Offense Report, dated 2 November 2015, reflects the applicant was apprehended for: Driving While Intoxicated. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 26 January 2016, reflects the applicant was driving while impaired. On 2 November 2015, while operating his automobile, he failed to obey a stop light. He continued forward into the intersection and violated the speed limit. After seeing these violations, a Texas Highway Patrol Trooper stopped his vehicle. During the stop, the Trooper observed multiple signs of intoxication at which time he admitted to consuming alcohol and submitted to a series of standardized field sobriety tests. After failing the test, he was detained and administered a breathalyzer test. The breath specimen yielded results of 0.107 and 0.102. It is illegal to operate a motor vehicle in the state of Texas with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more. Commander's Report, dated 1 April 2016, reflects the applicant received a FG Article 15, dated 23 March 2015, for leaving military installation without authorization, wrongfully consuming alcohol off installation, violating installation instructions by going off installation without a battle buddy/liberty, failing to return to installation by 2300 hours, behaving in a drunk and disorderly manner, and, attempting to steal a cell phone and wallet from a local patron of a bar off installation. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 3 March 2016, 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: Alcohol Dependence Uncomplicated. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, DD Form 214. 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), 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 14-3, prescribes a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record. (6) Paragraph 14-12c prescribes 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). f. 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 requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends an upgrade will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. The applicant contends wrongful use of marijuana was the reason for his discharge. The AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The record shows use of marijuana was not one of the specific reasons for his discharge. The applicant suggests his background is effecting his ability to obtain employment. If so, the applicant may apply to the US Army Crime Record Center (CRC) to request the removal of titling from Army Records. If the CRC directs the removal of the titling action, it will also inform the National Crime Records Center to take action regarding its records derived from CRC's records. If the CRC denies the request, the applicant may appeal to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records using the DD Form 149 or online application to request removal of the titling. Include with the application a photocopy of all documents sent to the CRC and the reply from the CRC. 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. Response to contentions: (1) The applicant contends an upgrade will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. (2) The applicant contends wrongful use of marijuana was the reason for his discharge. The Board found evidence supporting this contention, along with a myriad of other reasons for discharge, exhibiting a pattern of misconduct. (3) The applicant suggests his background is effecting his ability to obtain employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. c. The Board determined that the applicant was properly and equitably discharged. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant's contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The board voted not to change the applicant's characterization of service because of numerous incidents of misconduct: leaving post without authorization, unauthorized off-post alcohol use, battle buddy policy violation, curfew violation, being drunk and disorderly, as well as attempted larceny - none of which had medically mitigating factors contributing to the misconduct. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge because, despite applying liberal consideration, there were no BH diagnoses which mitigated the misconduct and the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) Because the characterization and reason were not changed, the SPD/RE codes will not change. 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 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 AR20190009937 1