1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 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. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, joining the Army a year out of high school to serve the country. Similar to many young people of the applicant’s age, the applicant was affected by the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers and decided to serve the country while still in elementary school. The applicant studied hard for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). It was a proud day for the applicant when the applicant became a 68W, Health Care Specialist, for the 44th Medical Brigade, Fort Bragg. The applicant was proud to be a private and later a specialist in the Army. The applicant arrived on time, completed all tasks, and became the best combat medic the applicant could be. The applicant placed heart and soul into being a Soldier; ready to serve and proud to be a part of the military. While part of the 44th Medical Brigade, the applicant received various awards and decorations. After approximately three years in service, the applicant began to experience panic attacks and severe anxiety, along with depression. At the time, the applicant did not know what was happening or how to control the anxiety. The applicant began to use alcohol, and later to abuse it. The applicant voluntarily participated in the Army Substance Abuse Program to get a handle on the alcohol abuse. The applicant managed to stay sober for six months, but with nothing to eliminate the anxiety and panic, the applicant began using alcohol again. By the applicant’s second voluntary admittance into the ASAP program, the applicant was at a loss as to what to do. The Army Substance Abuse Program dealt with the alcohol abuse, but it did not address what was causing the alcohol abuse. The applicant needed an inpatient rehabilitation program to get to the root of the problem but the applicant knew the applicant could not enter into an inpatient program without discharging or separating from the Army. The thought of leaving the Army was terrifying and the applicant was worried what this would do to others in the unit. Ultimately, the decision was made for the applicant, and the applicant was separated from the Army for alcohol abuse. Since then, the applicant has entered a comprehensive inpatient addiction program and been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) by a doctor at Solid Landings treatment center. The details of the applicant’s PTSD have been revealed as an event which happened in the emergency room of the Womack Hospital where the applicant was on duty as a medic and had witnessed the death of a family because of an accident. The applicant has been prescribed medication to cope with the panic and has successfully completed Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) psychotherapy to cope with the PTSD. The applicant is 14 months sober and managing a sober living house in California. The applicant is ready to go on with life and plan to continue with the education in the medical field. The applicant is ashamed and feels guilty over the discharge. The applicant thinks every day about how the applicant’s emotional breakdown affected many people in the unit. The applicant is ready to become a productive member of society. The applicant hopes the Board will honor the request for an upgrade and help the applicant move on in life. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 2 December 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: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure / AR 635-200, Chapter 9 / JPD / RE-4 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 28 August 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 July 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: The Service Member was an ASAP failure. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable / The intermediate commander recommended general (under honorable conditions). (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 18 July 2014, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 August 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 18 April 2011 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 68W10, Health Care Specialist / 3 years, 4 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Commander’s Report, dated 18 July 2014, reflects the applicant received a CG Article 15, dated 28 August 2013 for Assault. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3; forfeiture of $443; and extra duty and restriction for 14 days. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Applicant Provided and/or AMHHR Listed PTSD / TBI / Other Behavioral Health Conditions: The applicant provided: The ASAP Outpatient Treatment Plan and Review, dated 9 June 2014, reflecting the applicant was diagnosed with alcohol dependence; occupational, legal, and social problems; and a Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scale score of 68. Letter of Completion, dated 27 October 2015, reflecting the applicant successfully completed treatment at Rock Soldier Recovery on 14 May 2015. The applicant voluntarily admitted to Rock Soldier Recovery on 9 February 2015. A medical screenshot, dated 11 July 2017, reflecting the applicant had a psychiatric follow-up on 10 February 2015. The applicant was diagnosed with opioid dependence; sedative, hypnotic, or anxiolytic dependence; alcohol dependence; cannabis dependence; generalized anxiety disorder; bipolar disorder, not otherwise specified; PTSD; and panic disorder. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; ASAP Outpatient Treatment Plan and Review; separation orders; and medical documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends successfully completing EMDR psychotherapy to cope with PTSD, being 14 months sober and managing a sober living house; and planning to continue an education in the medical field. The applicant is ready to move on and become a productive member of society. 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 9 outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (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. (5) Paragraph 9-4, stipulates the service of Soldiers discharged under this section will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions unless the Soldier is in entry-level status and an uncharacterized description of service is required. An honorable discharge is mandated in any case in which the Government initially introduces into the final discharge process limited use evidence as defined by AR 600–85. 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 “JPD” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure. 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-4 applies to a person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable 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 requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant contends panic attacks, anxiety, and depression affected behavior which led to the discharge. The applicant provided documents reflecting the applicant was enrolled in ASAP and diagnosed with alcohol dependence; occupational, legal, and social problems; and a GAF score of 68. After the applicant’s discharge, the applicant was diagnosed with opioid dependence; sedative, hypnotic, or anxiolytic dependence; alcohol dependence; cannabis dependence; generalized anxiety disorder; bipolar disorder, not otherwise specified; PTSD; and panic disorder. The Army Military Human Resource Record is void of a mental status evaluation. The applicant contends good service. The applicant contends successfully completing EMDR psychotherapy to cope with PTSD; being 14 months sober and managing a sober living house; and planning to continue an education in the medical field. The applicant is ready to move on and become a productive member of society. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. No law or regulation provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life after 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. 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: Adjustment Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, PTSD, and Panic Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found, for purposes of liberal consideration, that the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, PTSD, and Panic Disorder existed during service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant’s behavioral health conditions do not mitigate the applicant’s the applicant’s ASAP failure. While the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder was diagnosed during service, the applicant’s official medical records reflect that this diagnosis was in response to the stress associated with being separated from the Army and therefore unconnected from the ASAP failure. (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 or asserted conditions outweighed the basis for applicant’s separation – ASAP failure – for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends panic attacks, anxiety, and depression affected behavior which led to the discharge. The Board considered this contention and determined the only service connected behavioral health condition the applicant was diagnosed with is an Adjustment Disorder stemming from stress associated with being separated from the Army, and as such does not mitigate the applicant’s ASAP failure. The Board, after weighing the totality of the evidence, found insufficient mitigating factors that would outweigh the basis for separation. Thus, the discharge is proper and equitable. (2) The applicant contends good service. The Board considered the totality of the applicant’s service record, but determined the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of the applicant’s 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 applicant’s ASAP failure, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation (3) The applicant contends successfully completing EMDR psychotherapy to cope with PTSD; being 14 months sober and managing a sober living house; and planning to continue an education in the medical field. The applicant contend that the applicant is ready to move on and become a productive member of society. The Board considered and determined that the applicant’s post-service conduct does not outweigh the applicant’s alcohol failure. Therefore, the applicant’s discharge is proper and equitable. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of 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 of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder did not excuse or mitigate the applicant’s ASAP failure. The remaining asserted conditions diagnosed post-service do not mitigate in-service conduct, as the VA has not diagnosed, or service connected any BH conditions. (2) . 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. (3) 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. (4) 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 AR20210002312 1