1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 August 2019 b. Date Received: 21 August 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was inequitable due to dealing with alcohol abuse and dependency. A single alcohol related incident impeded the ability to perform day to day duties due to physical injury. The applicant also contends the immediate commander recommended an honorable discharge, but was overturned by a higher commander unfamiliar with the applicant's conduct and character. The applicant further contends in 27 months of service there was no punitive actions taken. In a records review conducted on 18 March 2022, and by a 5 - 0 vote, the Board determined the characterization was improper. The record shows the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test which was coded RO (Rehabilitation Testing) and that it was part of the applicant's Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan. The inclusion of the test administered as part of the applicant's rehabilitation program is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85 and is protected evidence. 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. 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 Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200 / Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-4 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. c. Date of Discharge: 20 December 2018 d. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 11 September 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The applicant failed a total of three medical urinalysis tests and the applicant stated there was no intentions of refraining from drinking. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: The applicant declined the opportunity to speak with an attorney. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 21 September 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 September 2016 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / HS Graduate / 134 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 18X1P, SF Recruit / 2 years, 3 months, 8 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR, ASR, Parachutist Badge g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: A Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 11 April 2018, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Use Disorder-Severe. The applicant was a self-referral on 6 March 2018, secondary to a suicide attempt while under the influence of alcohol. The applicant attempted suicide by drinking alcohol extensively. The applicant met DSM 5 diagnostic criteria for Alcohol Use Disorder-Severe and was enrolled in SUDCC on 12 April 2018. This was the applicant's first enrollment. During a progress meeting with the command and 1SG C, on 24 May 2018, the counselor discussed the applicant's on- going alcohol misuse as well as the applicant's report of drinking consistently since enrollment. The applicant stated there was no intention to refrain from drinking and did not want to attend a higher level of care consistent with the addition. The applicant failed three medical UAs. In consultation with 1SG C and MAJ F, on 24 May 2018, command deemed the applicant a rehabilitation failure and requested documentation to support an administrative separation due to the applicant's continued alcohol use and unwillingness to rehabilitate. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, Letters of Support-3, ERB, Memorandum, subject: Separation Under AR 635-200, Chapter 9...., dated 11 September 2018. 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 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 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to 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. 8. SUMMARY 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 requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable due to dealing with alcohol abuse and dependency. The applicant's service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Alcohol Use Disorder-Severe. The record shows that on 11 April 2018, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which reflects the applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Use Disorder-Severe. The applicant was a self-referral on 6 March 2018, secondary to a suicide attempt while under the influence of alcohol. The applicant attempted suicide by drinking alcohol extensively. The applicant met DSM 5 diagnostic criteria for Alcohol Use Disorder-Severe and was enrolled in SUDCC on 12 April 2018. This was the applicant's first enrollment. During a progress meeting with the command and 1SG C, on 24 May 2018, the counselor discussed the applicant's on- going alcohol misuse as well as the applicant's report of drinking consistently since enrollment. The applicant stated there was no intention to refrain from drinking and did not want to attend a higher level of care consistent with the addition. The applicant failed three medical UAs. In consultation with 1SG C and MAJ F, on 24 May 2018, command deemed the applicant a rehabilitation failure and requested documentation to support an administrative separation due to the applicant's continued alcohol use and unwillingness to rehabilitate. The applicant contends the immediate commander recommended an honorable discharge, but was overturned by a higher commander unfamiliar with the applicant's conduct and character. 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 applicant contends in 27 months of service there was no punitive actions taken. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of the service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. 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? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation. Applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder. The Board's Medical Advisor also opines the applicant also met criteria for a diagnosis of Dysthymic Disorder (Persistent Depressive Disorder) while on active duty. Both Adjustment Disorder and Dysthymic Disorder are potentially mitigating BH conditions. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the BH conditions of Adjustment Disorder and Dysthymic Disorder occurred during military service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? N/A. The Board's Medical Advisor, using liberal consideration, opined the applicant's BH conditions mitigated applicant's basis for separation, but the Board concluded that the discharge was improper after finding the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test which was coded RO (Rehabilitation Testing) and that testing was part of the applicant's Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan. Therefore, the Board voted to upgrade the discharge characterization to Honorable in conformance with the Army's Limited Use Policy. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A. b. Response to Contentions: (1) The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable due to dealing with alcohol abuse and dependency. The Board determined that this contention was valid but voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to the improper introduction of protected evidence in violation of the Army's Limited Use Policy. (2) The applicant contends in 27 months of service there was no punitive actions taken. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings but voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to the improper introduction of protected evidence in violation of the Army's Limited Use Policy. (3) The applicant contends the immediate commander recommended an honorable discharge, but was overturned by a higher commander unfamiliar with the applicant's conduct and character. The Board considered this contention during proceedings, but ultimately did not address the contention due to an upgrade being granted based on the improper introduction of protected evidence in violation of the Army's Limited Use Policy. c. The Board determined the characterization was improper. The record shows the government introduced into the discharge packet the results of a biochemical test which was coded RO (Rehabilitation Testing) and that it was part of the applicant's Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) treatment plan. The inclusion of the test administered as part of the applicant's rehabilitation program is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85 and is protected evidence. Use of this information mandates award of an honorable characterization of service. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because of the improper introduction of protected evidence in violation of the Army's Limited Use Policy. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. The record demonstrates the applicant did fail his Alcohol Rehabilitation program. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority 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 N/A - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) - Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Re-entry 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 AR20190013281 4