1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 9 November 2019 b. Date Received: 12 November 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant’s Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant served the country at a very young age (17) and in doing so after September 11, became mentally overwhelmed and turned to drugs and alcohol while serving. Since the applicant separation applicant has lived a meaningful life and became a parent and regret the mistakes the applicant made while enlisted at that young age. It was a troubling and influential time in the applicant life and that the applicant would not like to redo. The applicant decided to serve because the applicant father served honorable, and to make the applicant mother proud seeing as though the applicant had intentions of going to college after graduating in June 2003. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 27 July 2022, 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: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c (2) / JKK / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 10 June 2005 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 May 2005 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for failing to report at the place of duty on several occasions; being found drunk on duty while performing suicide watch guard on 19 and 20 February 2004; being disrespectful towards NCOs on several occasions; being derelict towards duties; destroying military property; violating Fort Huachuca policy by drinking underage on 19 February 2004 and 18 April 2005; assaulting a fellow Soldier on 18 April 2005, and wrongfully using marijuana on or between 16 March 2005 and 15 April 2005. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 6 May 2005 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of the case by an administrative separation Board) as noted in the Pretrial Agreement (Offer to Plead Guilty) dated 6 May 2005, which the applicant after consulting with defense counsel and being fully advised of legal and moral right to plead not guilty offered to plead guilty to violating a general order, wrongful use of marijuana, and assault and battery. To accept an under other than honorable conditions discharge in the action initiated to separate the applicant pursuant to AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 12 and to waive the right to demand a separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 June 2005 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 July 2003 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / HS Graduate / 97 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 25L10, Cable Systems Installer- Maintainer / 1 year, 9 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (25 April 2004 to 23 September 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 24 January 2005, for failing to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty on 9 February 2004, 10 February 2004, 8 March 2004 and 22 March 2004; being disrespectful in deportment towards a noncommissioned officer on 19 August 2004; disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer on 22 November 2004; and being absent without leave from 20 December 2004 to 11 January 2004 (2005). The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $596.00 pay per month for two months, restriction for 45 days, and extra duty for 45 days. To be admonished orally. FG Article 15 dated 14 April 2004, for violating a lawful regulation, to wit; Fort Huachuca drinking age policy 116, dated 14 February 2002 and being found drunk while on duty as suicide watch guard, on 19 February 2004. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $596.00 of pay for two months; and 45 days extra duty and restriction. Electronic copy of the DD Form 2624, dated 25 April 2005, reflects the applicant tested positive for THC 86 during an Inspection Unit (IU) urinalysis testing conducted on 15 April 2005. CID Report dated 3 May 2005, which indicates the applicant was the subject of investigation for wrongful use of cocaine and wrongful use of marijuana. Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial dated 11 May 2005, for violating a lawful general order by drinking while under the age on 18 April 2005, wrongfully using marijuana between 16 March and 15 April 2005, and striking G.G.M., in the face with his face. The punishment consisted of confinement for 30 days and forfeiture of $823.00. Pretrial Agreement (Offer to Plead Guilty) dated 6 May 2005, which the applicant after consulting with defense counsel and being fully advised of legal and moral right to plead not guilty and to place the burden of proving guilty beyond a reasonable doubt upon the prosecution, offered to plead guilty to violating a general order, wrongful use of marijuana, and assault and battery. To accept an under other than honorable conditions discharge in the action initiated to separate pursuant to AR 635-200, Chapter 14, Paragraph 12 and to waive the right to demand a separation board. Several negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: Confinement Military Authority 27 days (11 May 2005 to 6 June 2005), as directed by Summary Court-Martial. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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) 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 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. (6) 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. (7) Paragraph 14-12c(2) terms abuse of illegal drugs as serious misconduct. It continues; however, by recognizing relevant facts may mitigate the nature of the offense. Therefore, a single drug abuse offense may be combined with one or more minor disciplinary infractions or incidents of other misconduct and processed for separation under paragraph 14- 12a or 14-12b as appropriate. 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 “JKK” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c(2), misconduct (drug abuse). f. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers’ Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waivable and nonwaivable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaivable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation, or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. 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 Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant’s AMHRR indicates separation action was initiated against the applicant for failing to report at the place of duty on several occasions; being found drunk on duty while performing suicide watch guard on 19 and 20 February 2004; being disrespectful towards NCOs on several occasions; being derelict towards duties; destroying military property; violating Fort Huachuca policy by drinking underage on 19 February 2004 and 18 April 2005; assaulting a fellow Soldier on 18 April 2005; and wrongfully using marijuana on or between 16 March 2005 and 15 April 2005. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c (2), AR 635-200 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is “Misconduct (Drug Abuse),” and the separation code is “JKK.” The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant served the country at a very young age (17) and in doing so after September 11, became mentally overwhelmed and turned to drugs and alcohol while serving. Since the applicant separation the applicant has lived a meaningful life and became a father and regret the mistakes the applicant made while enlisted at that young age. It was a troubling and influential time in the applicant life and that the applicant would not like to redo. The applicant decided to serve because the applicant father served honorable, and to make the applicant mother proud seeing as though the applicant had intentions of going to college after graduating in June 2003. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant’s numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant, by violating the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the special trust and confidence placed in a Soldier. The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career that ultimately caused his discharge from the Army. The applicant contends, in effect, suffering from a medical condition. 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 Medical Advisor reviewed DoD and VA medical records and found no mitigating BH diagnoses on the applicant. The applicant provided no documents or testimony of a condition or experience, that, when applying liberal consideration, could have excused or mitigated a discharge. (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? No. Despite the Board’s application of liberal consideration, the Board considered the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant had any conditions or experiences that outweighed the basis for applicant’s separation – FTR, being drunk on duty while performing suicide watch guard, being disrespectful towards NCOs on several occasions, being derelict towards duties, destroying military property, violating Fort Huachuca policy by drinking underage, assaulting a fellow Soldier, and wrongfully using marijuana. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant seeks relief contending having served applicant’s country at a very young age (17) after 11 September and in doing so became mentally overwhelmed and turned to drugs and alcohol while serving. The Board considered this contention but determined that the Army has many legitimate avenues available to service members requesting assistance with being mentally overwhelmed, and there is no evidence in the official records nor provided by the applicant that such assistance was pursued. The Board concluded that the applicant abusing drugs and alcohol is not an acceptable response to dealing with being mentally overwhelmed; thus, the applicant was properly and equitably discharged. (2) The applicant seeks relief contending since separation applicant has lived a meaningful life and became a father and regrets mistakes made while enlisted at that young age. The ADRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge must be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character. In this case, the Board determined that the applicant was properly and equitably discharged due to the severity of the offenses. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, considering the current evidence of record. The applicant has exhausted their appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. 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, despite applying liberal consideration of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant did not have any BH diagnoses that could excuse or mitigate the offenses of FTR, being drunk on duty while performing suicide watch guard, being disrespectful towards NCOs on several occasions, being derelict towards duties, destroying military property, violating Fort Huachuca policy by drinking underage, assaulting a fellow Soldier, and wrongfully using marijuana. The 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. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (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: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20200001231 1