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: The current characterization of service for the period under review is honorable. The applicant requests reentry code change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, during the term of service, the applicant served honorably and was very good at the military occupational specialty. The applicant completed several training courses and deployed to Iraq. The applicant developed a drinking problem, especially after deployment. The things the applicant experienced during and after deployment caused the drinking issue to escalate. The applicant used the alcohol to numb the thoughts. The applicant has not had a drink since 31 December 2011. The applicant's sergeant twisted the events to have the applicant discharged from the service. The applicant was stupid and young at the time and did not care. The applicant regrets the decision not to fight the discharge every day. The applicant does not believe the one incident deserves a discharge, which prevents the applicant from going to college. The applicant was discharged for drinking while in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP). When the applicant returned from Iraq, the applicant was never informed of being in the program and never went with the commanding officer to sign up for ASAP. The applicant was drinking because the applicant was not in the program and was not instructed not to drink. Staff Sergeant (SSG) M. saw the applicant drinking one night and months after the incident and after the applicant was actually enrolled in the program, SSG M. pursued discharge. The rest of the applicant's service was honorable. The applicant took the service seriously, but just had a problem with alcohol. The applicant has not been in any trouble or had a drink in seven years. The applicant struggled since the discharge until recently. The applicant has a spouse and four beautiful children. The applicant has a good job and is finally doing well. The applicant requests an RE code change to at least RE-3 to be eligible for reenlistment. The applicant desires to serve because it was the greatest achievement and proudest moment in the applicant's life. In a records review conducted on 9 June 2022, and by a 3 - 2 vote, the Board approved the request for a Reentry Code change to RE-3. The current characterization of service is Honorable. 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 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge: 9 March 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 31 January 2011 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 24 July 2010, the applicant was declared a rehabilitation failure and released from the Army Substance Abuse Program, due to the applicant's continued use of alcohol. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 1 February 2011, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 February 2011 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 30 December 2008 / 3 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 2 years, 2 months, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 October 2009 - 26 June 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: FG Article 15, dated 19 January 2010, for wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the age of 21 (9 January 2010). The punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $724 pay per month for two months; extra duty and restriction for 45 days; and, an oral reprimand. Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 13 July 2010, reflects the applicant was present for a rehabilitation team meeting, which reflects the applicant was command enrolled in ASAP, Treatment Level 1. The form indicates the command criteria for success: No alcohol/drug- related incidents, no alcohol or other drug use, keep all scheduled appointments, meet treatment goals and make a good personal assessment of alcohol/drug use at the end of each session. Consequences for Rehabilitation Failure: Chapter. The form was endorsed by the commander, the counselor, and the applicant. Sworn Statement made by Specialist M.C., dated 25 July 2010, reflects the applicant was returned to the barracks by a Soldier from a different battalion. The applicant was in a drunken sleep and had to be escorted to the barracks room. The applicant had grass stains on the back right shoulder and admitted to trying to fight others the applicant was with. The applicant was told to go to the applicant's room, but went out the back stairway and urinated with pants down behind the barracks. The applicant finished urinating, and walked down to the applicant's room window and jumped through the window onto the bed. Memorandum for Record, subject: Request for Breathalyzer, dated 25 July 2010, the commander requested a breathalyzer because the company Charge of Quarters found the applicant to be under the influence of alcohol at 0300. At the time, the applicant was enrolled in ASAP and was not authorized to consume alcohol. Synopsis of Rehabilitation Efforts for [Applicant], dated 3 December 2010, reflects the applicant's rehabilitation team met on 29 November 2010, and determined the applicant was declared a rehabilitation failure due to the inability to abstain from alcohol use while enrolled in ASAP. Serious Incident Report, dated 10 December 2010, reflects, Specialist (SPC) S. was checking the barracks and noticed the applicant was acting funny and slurring speech. The applicant told SPC S., the applicant had taken ambient, but was not able to accurately state how many were taken. The applicant was transported to the Samaritan Medical Center by ambulance. The applicant's blood was drawn, which resulted in a blood alcohol content of .29. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical Examination, dated 10 December 2010, the examining medical physician noted in the summary of defects and diagnoses section: Alcohol Abuse. Report of Medical History, dated 15 December 2010, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: ASAP counseling; Alcohol Abuse. Report of Behavioral Health Evaluation, dated 12 January 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. The applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol Dependence. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends abstaining from alcohol since 31 December 2011, maintaining employment, and doing well with a beautiful family. 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) 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. (4) 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. (5) Chapter 15 provides explicitly for separation under the prerogative of the Secretary of the Army. Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom delegated. Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the Army's best interest. Separations under this paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the Secretary's approved designee as announced in updated memoranda. Secretarial separation authority is normally exercised on a case-by-case basis. 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-1 Applies to: Person completing his or her term of active service who is considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army. Eligibility: Qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met. 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. RE-4 Applies to: 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 a reentry code change. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of AMHRR indicates on 29 November 2010, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure due the applicant's inability to abstain from alcohol use while enrolled in ASAP. The applicant contends alcohol affected behavior and led to the discharge. The record shows the applicant underwent a behavioral health evaluation (BHE) on 12 January 2011, which indicates 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 Dependence. The BHE was considered by the separation authority. The applicant contends the command never informed the applicant of being enrolled in ASAP or not being allowed to drink alcohol. The AMHRR reflects the applicant was command referred in ASAP and the enrollment document was endorsed by the applicant prior to the misconduct, which led to the discharge. The AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of the discharge. The AMHRR shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. 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 601-210, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of "4." An RE code of "4" cannot be waived, and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. The applicant contends abstaining from alcohol since 31 December 2011, maintaining employment, and doing well with a beautiful family. 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. Applicant was diagnosed Depression, and he is service connected by the VA for Major Depressive Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with Depression, and he is service connected by the VA for Major Depressive Disorder. (3) Does the condition or experience excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor opined that the applicant was diagnosed in service with Depression, and he is service connected by the VA for Major Depressive Disorder. Given the nexus between Depression and self-medicating with substances, there was likely some association between applicant's Depression and his discharge for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. He already has an Honorable characterization of service by reason of Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, which is appropriate. Applicant requests an upgrade to his RE Code. The Board's Medical Advisor recommended an RE Code of no higher than 3 due to his service connected BH conditions which contributed to the misconduct associated with discharge and if untreated would more thalikely lead to similar service disqualifying misconduct. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Based on liberally considering all the evidence before the Board, the ADRB determined that the condition or experience did not outweigh the basis of separation, Drug Rehabilitation Failure. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends youth and immaturity affected the applicant's behavior at the time of the discharge. Due to the seriousness of the misconduct including conscious, deliberate decisions the applicant made when presented with challenges, youthful indiscretion does not excuse the misconduct. 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 Board voted after considering the contention and finding no evidence of the Command acting in an arbitrary or capricious manner. In this case, the Board determined the lack of admission of guilt for alcohol-related misconduct, ASAP failure, and failure to meet the burden of proof of sobriety. (2) The applicant contends the event which led to the discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. The Board considered this contention and the applicant's assertion of an isolated incident, however the Board determined that there is no evidence, and the applicant did not provide supporting documentation to provide merit to the claim. Ultimately, the Board determined that the assertion alone did not outweigh the basis of separation due to the severity of the offenses. (3) The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. The Board determined 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 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 characterization of service due to it already being Honorable (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code and the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The Board voted to change the RE code to RE-3, because the board decided if the applicant can prove to a recruiter's satisfaction that he no longer suffers from Major Depressive Disorder the applicant should be able to obtain a waiver and serve in the military. 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: RE-3 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 AR20210002909 1