1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 31 January 2020 b. Date Received: 25 February 2010 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and change to the narrative reason for separation to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident during a period of service of six and a half years with no other adverse action. He was struggling with the death of a mentor and very close friend, who had taken his life three days following his return to Fort Bliss, TX after his deployment. He was unable to adjust and grieve his passing, as he was transferred platoons and required to run a headquarters platoon and serve as master gunner. He was not letting himself show pain and anger for his loss, denying the feelings and self-medicating with alcohol whenever his work day ended. His unit behavioral health specialists, diagnosed him with PTSD and other issues that were affecting his day to day life and influencing his self-destructive behavior. Prior to his separation, the civilian charges that stemmed from his arrest, were fully dismissed by an El Paso County, TX Judge. He was separated one calendar month prior to completion of his second term of service. 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 Adjustment Disorder. The applicant is 50% service connected for combat related PTSD. The VA has also diagnosed the applicant with PTSD, Adjustment Disorder. In summary, the applicant has 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 14 October 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBH and service-connected PTSD diagnosis), and prior period of honorable service. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 18 April 2017 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 24 August 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for his discharge; physically control a vehicle, a passenger car while drunk (29 November 2015). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 26 August 2016, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested consideration of his case by an administrative separation board. (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 10 January 2017, the applicant was notified to appear before an administrative separation board and advised of his rights. On 23 January 2017, the administrative separation board convened. The applicant appeared with counsel. The board recommended the applicant be discharged with issuance of a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 April 2017, the separation approving authority approved the findings and recommendations of the administrative separation board and directed the applicant's separation with a characterization of service of General (Under Honorable Conditions). 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 22 May 2012 / 5 years / period of enlistment extracted from the Enlisted Record Brief. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 years / 1-year college / 125 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 11B10, Infantryman / 7 years / 2 months, 3 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 16 February 2010 to 21 May 2012 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Djibouti, 30 January 2015 to 15 September 2015 f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-3, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NOPDR, ASR, MUC g. Performance Ratings: 2 December 2012 to 11 December 2014, Fully Capable 12 December 2014 to 11 December 2015, Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 1 February 2016, for physically control a vehicle, a passenger car while drunk (29 November 2015); reduction to SPC / E-4, forfeiture of $1,191 pay for two months (suspended), extra duty for 45 days (suspended), restriction for 45 days and an oral reprimand. An administrative General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 16 February 2016, on 29 November 2015, he was apprehended by an El Paso Police for driving while intoxicated after he fled the scene of an accident. He was administered a breathalyzer test that confirmed his consumption of alcohol and revealed his blood alcohol content to be .181 percent, in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Texas Penal Code. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated, 13 October 2016, relates the applicant was screened TBI, PTSD and MST, the findings were negative. He did not meet criteria or for a mental health disorder. He was mentally responsible for his behavior, could distinguish right from wrong and possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate intelligently in any proceedings deemed appropriate by his chain of command. The applicant received a negative counseling statement, dated 30 November 2015, for driving while intoxicated. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: VA document, undated, relates the applicant was assigned a 50 percent evaluation for PTSD. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages); applicant's statement (two pages); County Criminal Court 2, EL Paso County Texas, Motion to Dismiss document; VA document; letter of recommendation; support statement, administrative separation board; AGCM Orders 88-001; three AAM Certificates; three recommendations for award (six pages); Certificate of Achievement; and three NCO Evaluation Reports. 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, 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 requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and change to the narrative reason for separation to include the RE code. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms 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. By the documented misconduct (serious offense), the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. 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 requests a change to the narrative reason for separation to include the RE code. 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 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense). The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident during a period of service of six and a half years with no other adverse action. Although an isolated single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by an isolated incident provides the basis for a characterization of service. The applicant's isolated incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant further contends, he was struggling with the death of a mentor and very close friend, who had taken his life three days following his return to Fort Bliss, TX after his deployment; and he was unable to adjust and grieve his passing, as he was transferred platoons and required to run a headquarters platoon and serve as master gunner. The record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Community Counseling Center and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. The applicant also contends, he was not letting himself show pain and anger for his loss, denying the feelings and self-medicating with alcohol whenever his work day ended. He had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant additionally contends, his unit behavioral health specialists, diagnosed him with PTSD and other issues that were affecting his day to day life and influencing his self-destructive behavior. The service record contains no evidence of an in-service PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the applicant submitted a post service VA document which shows he was assigned a 50 percent evaluation for PTSD. A higher evaluation of 70 percent was not warranted for PTSD. Furthermore, the applicant contends prior to his separation, the civilian charges that stemmed from his arrest, were fully dismissed by an El Paso County, TX Judge. The evidence of record (motion to dismiss), revealed that his case was dismissed due to successful completion of the pre-trial diversion program. Lastly, the applicant contends, he was separated one calendar month prior to completion of his second term of service. 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. Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their 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 was 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 his 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 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 14 October 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (OBH and service-connected PTSD diagnosis), and prior period of honorable service. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, the narrative reason for separation to Misconduct (Minor Infractions), and the separation code to JKN. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions) d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JKN / 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 AR20200004839 1