1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 February 2020 b. Date Received: 21 February 2020 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant, through counsel, requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, a narrative reason change, separation code change and a reentry eligibility (RE) code change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the administrative separation board erred when: It determined the applicant should be administratively separated under AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c and d. It determined the applicant's command did not, or reasonably could not have known of the applicant's arrest for DWI in 2013. It determined the applicant's arrests for DWI in 2013 and 2015 could be used for separation purposes. It determined the applicant's arrest for DWI in 2013 could be used to determine characterization of discharge. It determined the applicant's characterization of discharge to be General (Under Honorable Conditions). The applicant states, he did not intentionally deceive the command or lie on his reenlistment contract. The applicant's chain of command violated Army Regulations in separating the applicant under AR 635-200, chapter 14. The applicant further details the contentions in an allied brief provided with the application. 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. The applicant is 60% service connected, 30% for Neurosis (Anxiety Disorder). 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 16 October 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 11 March 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 3 May 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 29 August 2015 and on or about 14 August 2013, he wrongfully operated a motor vehicle while impaired. Subsequently, he received General Officer Memorandums of Reprimand filed on 16 March 2017 and 13 April 2017. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 May 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 12 September 2017, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 14 November 2017, the administrative separation board convened and the applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant's discharge with characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). On 10 January 2018, the separation authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant's discharge with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: The separation authority's decision memorandum is void from the service record; however, the separation authority approved the administrative separation board's recommendation for separation on 10 January 2018. / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 March 2016 / 2 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 30 / 2 years college / 124 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-6 / 68W3P, Health Care Specialist / 11 years, 2 months, 1 day d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 11 January 2007 - 11 April 2010 / HD RA, 12 April 2010 - 11 March 2016 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii, SWA / Afghanistan (15 August 2011 - 14 August 2012); Iraq (18 December 2007 - 15 July 2008; 15 August 2009 - 30 July 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM-4, AAM-4, MUC-2, USNUC, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-2CS, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-3, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 31 August 2015 - 29 August 2016 / Highly Qualified 30 August 2016 - 29 August 2017 / Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 1 August 2016, for driving while under the influence of alcohol. On 29 August 2015, Harnett County Police conducted a license checkpoint. Upon approaching the check point, the applicant came to a sudden stop. Upon approaching his vehicle, the officer detected an odor of alcohol emitting from his person. The applicant underwent a field sobriety test and a breathalyzer test, which showed his blood alcohol content was .11 percent. His actions were unacceptable and would not be tolerated. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 2 February 2017, for driving while under the influence of alcohol. On 14 August 2013, Harnett County Police conducted a license checkpoint. Upon approaching the applicant's vehicle, the police officer detected an odor of alcohol emitting from his person. The applicant underwent a field sobriety test and a breathalyzer test, which showed his blood alcohol content was .10 percent. The applicant's actions were unacceptable and would not be tolerated. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 September 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 abuse, uncomplicated. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; DAIG complaint submission confirmation; Discharge Upgrade Brief; Separation Board Summarized Transcript; AR 600-20, 2-18; FM 7- 21.13; FM 7-22.7; AR 635-200, 1-15; AR 635-200, 14-2; Commander's Report; AR 635-200, 3- 5; AR 135-178, 2-9; The Commander's Legal Handbook, 28-4; Good Soldier Book; ASAP Completion Certificate; two GOMORs; GOMOR response; Voluntary Dismissal; Separation Initiation. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general (under honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12c states 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. 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). 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. 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, through counsel, requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, a narrative reason change, separation code change and a reentry eligibility (RE) code change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ"." 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 regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The applicant contends the administrative separation board was improper in that it considered misconduct from previous periods of service and then made a determination to separate the applicant based on the misconduct with a General (Under Honorable Conditions). Also, t he applicant's chain of command violated Army Regulations in separating the applicant under AR 635-200, chapter 14. However, 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. Further, the notification of initiation of separation proceedings, specifically reflects the applicant received two GOMORs during his current enlistment based on misconduct from a previous period of service. The applicant contends the events that caused his discharge from the Army were isolated incidents. Although a isolated incidents, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that he had good service which included three combat tours. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. 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. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 16 October 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 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 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 AR20200004607 1