1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 24 January 2020 b. Date Received: 7 February 2020 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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable conditions. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the character of the discharge received was extreme because it was under "Commission of a Serious Offense" drinking alcohol under the age of 21. The applicant states a poor decision was made to use alcohol to cope with the stress of the applicant’s mother being deployed to Afghanistan. The applicant is requesting an upgrade to be able to use the G.I. Bill benefits. The applicant has learned the applicant’s lesson and is now trying to further education and provide for the family. The applicant believes that the applicant deserves to be able to use the benefits associated with being willing to serve this country and wanted to be in the Army for a career and retire like both parents. The applicant made some mistakes but doesn’t believe those mistakes should cripple the rest of the applicant’s life. The applicant also desires to reenlist. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 18 November 2022, and by a 3-2 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 (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 30 May 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 December 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 14 August 2011 the applicant failed to obey a lawful general order by wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the age of 21. Additionally, the applicant drove recklessly on 26 August 2011 and failed to report at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty on 28 June 2011, 13 July 2011, 27 July 2011, and 29 July 2011. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 8 December 2011 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 May 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 6 October 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 128 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25U10, Signal Support System Specialist / 1 year, 7 months, 25 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Five Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. CG Article 15, dated 8 August 2011, for failing to be at the appointed place of duty on 28 June 2011, 13, 27 and 29 July 2011. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $383.00 pay per month for one month, extra duty for 14 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 10 September 2011 and restriction to the limits of the barracks (normal limits are company area, dining/medical facility, place of worship and place of duty) for 14 days, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 10 September 2011. State of Colorado Evidential Breath Alcohol Test, Ft. Carson PD, Intoxilyzer - Alcohol Analyzer, dated 14 August 2011, indicates applicant had a reported BAC of 0.012% on a alcohol breath test conducted on 14 August 2011. FG Article 15 dated 13 September 2011, for failing to obey a lawful order by consuming alcohol while under the age of 21 years on14 August 2011. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $733 pay per month for two months, extra duty for 45 days and restriction to the limits of company area, dining/medical facility, place of worship and place of duty, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 14 March 2012. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 14 September 2011, 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. One Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant’s duty status changed as follows: From “Present for Duty (PDY)” to “Confined by Civilian Authorities (CCA)” effective 24 May 2012. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 6 Days (AWOL, 24 May 2012 – 30 May 2012) Apprehended by Civilian Authorities. 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), 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. 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 waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waiverable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. 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 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 consuming alcohol due to the stress of the applicant’s mother being deployed to Afghanistan and this affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant ever sought assistance before committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends an upgrade would allow educational benefits through the GI Bill. Eligibility for veteran’s benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. Soldiers processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 601-201, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of “3.” An RE Code of “3” indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army’s needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 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 and found that the applicant has the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses/experiences: The applicant held an in-service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder related to difficulty with applicant’s mother’s deployment. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant held an in-service diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder related to difficulty with applicant’s mother’s deployment. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that an Adjustment Disorder is a low level, temporary difficulty adjusting or coping with psychosocial stressors that do not impair cognitive abilities; the diagnosis would not impact ability to know right from wrong and understand the consequences. (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, a voting member, that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder outweighed the basis for applicant’s separation – wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the age of 21, reckless driving, and FTRs. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends consuming alcohol due to the stress of the applicant’s mother being deployed to Afghanistan and this affected behavior and ultimately caused the discharge. The Board considered this contention and determined the applicant’s BH condition that was linked to difficulty with the applicant’s mother being deployed to Afghanistan did not affect the applicant’s ability to determine right from wrong, does not mitigate the applicant’s underage drinking, and that there were insufficient factors found in the totality of the applicant’s AMHRR that could have outweighed the discharge. Thus, the applicant’s discharge is proper and equitable. (2) The applicant contends an upgrade would allow educational benefits through the GI Bill. The Board considered this contention and determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. (3) The applicant contends a desire to rejoin the Military Service. The Board considered this contention and voted to maintain the RE-code at RE-3, which is a waivable code. An RE Code of “3” indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army’s needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes, if appropriate. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, considering the current evidence of record. 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, despite applying liberal consideration, the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder did not mitigate the basis for applicant’s separation – failing to obey a lawful general order by wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the age of 21, reckless driving, and FTRs. The Board condisdered the following acts of misconduct serious in nature: driving recklessly; giving a false report and fleeing the scene of an accident; two encounters with law enforcement regarding traffic violations (on and off-post); and AWOL. 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, and 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 AR20200004681 1