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 general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, human beings make mistakes and deserve a second chance, but are judged by the one mistake rather than the good accomplishments. The applicant does not intend to trivialize the seriousness of the DWI offense while in the military and wishes it never happened. The applicant had aspirations of becoming a career Soldier, but cannot change the past. The applicant received a Certificate of Achievement in basic training for being the Soldier of the Cycle; various awards in Korea as a Human Resource Specialist; and, awards in Fort Drum, NY, for being in charge of two mailrooms. These are just a few of the applicant's accomplishments in four years of service. The applicant is not proud of the DWI, which led to the chain of command's decision to separate the applicant from the Army and accepts full responsibility for the incident. After the DWI, the applicant attempted to show the chain of command the applicant was an asset to the unit by volunteering to speak with fellow Soldiers about the consequences of bad decisions. The applicant attended the STOP DWI Victim Panel and Prime for Life programs. Despite the command's decision to discharge, the applicant maintained a positive attitude and influence to the Soldiers for the remainder of the time in service. Since the discharge, it has been a constant struggle for the applicant and the applicant's family. The stigma of a less than honorable discharge was greater than the applicant anticipated. The applicant was denied unemployment benefits. The applicant had several job interviews in the Human Resources field, but was not afforded the opportunity due to the discharge and has been working odd jobs. The applicant visited an Army Recruiter and was told the applicant had to wait a minimum of two years because of the discharge and reentry code. The applicant completed Occupational Safety and Health Administration 10, Certificate of Fitness for Fire Guard for Torch Operations and Construction Sites (F-60). The applicant has one year of sobriety and became a better person, spouse, and parent. The applicant was told by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the general (under honorable conditions) discharge made the applicant ineligible for Post 9/11 educational benefits. The applicant desires to pursue a career in the medical field as a Dental Hygienist, which would provide the family financial stability. The applicant requests an upgrade, a narrative reason change, and a reentry code change. The applicant believes the character of service does not reflect the overall service and sacrifice made to the country and is confident the Board will upgrade the discharge after reviewing the complete military record. In a records review conducted on 20 May 2022, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's Adjustment Disorder outweighing the basis for separation. 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), with a corresponding separation code of JKN. The Board determined the RE code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 15 February 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 5 December 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 27 August 2017, the applicant was driving while under the influence of alcohol. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 5 December 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 17 January 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 29 October 2013 / 4 years, 27 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / GED / 101 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 42A10, Human Resources Specialist / 3 years, 10 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Desk Blotter, dated 27 August 2017, reflects the applicant was arrested for Driving in the Wrong Direction on One- Way Street; Driving While Intoxicated; and Improper/No Signal. The report noted the applicant's previous offenses were being absent without leave (AWOL) on 9 June 2014 and Desertion on 15 June 2014. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 5 September 2017, reflects the applicant was driving under the influence of alcohol. On 27 August 2017, Watertown Police initiated a traffic stop when the officer observed the applicant's vehicle traveling the wrong way on a one- way street and failing to use a proper turn signal. The applicant failed a field sobriety test and a breathalyzer test detected a blood alcohol content of .12 percent BAC. The applicant submitted rebuttal matters. Developmental Counseling Form, dated 5 October 2017, for initiation of separation proceedings for alcohol related incident. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 30 October 2017, 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 evaluation did not indicate any diagnosis. The separation packet contains a rebuttal statement from the applicant, third party character statements, awards, and training certificates. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 1 year, 3 months, 8 days: NIF, 10 December 2013 - 8 June 2014 / NIF AWOL, 9 June 2014 - 8 July 2014 / NIF NIF, 9 July 2014 - 16 March 2015 / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical Examination, dated 25 October 2017, the examining medical physician noted in the summary of defects and diagnoses section: Alcohol Abuse Disorder; PTSD; Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbance of Emotions and Conduct. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; self-authored statement; Commander's Report, 1 of 3 pages; six third party character statements; three certificates of training. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant contends completing Occupational Safety and Health Administration 10 training; attaining the Certificate of Fitness for Fire Guard for Torch Operations and Construction Sites (F-60); and, being sober for one year, becoming a better person, spouse, and parent. 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 waivable and nonwaivable 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 waivable. 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 the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed to convenience of the government. 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 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, governs the preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends good service. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant and recognizes the applicant's good service while in the Army. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. 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 contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. The applicant contends completing Occupational Safety and Health Administration 10 training; attaining the Certificate of Fitness for Fire Guard for Torch Operations and Construction Sites (F-60); and, being sober for one year, becoming a better person, spouse, and parent. 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. 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." There is no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or the RE 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. 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 DoD and VA medical records, applicant submissions and third party statements, and found the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder, Alcohol Abuse, Alcohol Dependence, PTSD, and Unspecified Sleep Disorder, which, in the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, after applying liberal consideration, could potentially mitigate a discharge. (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 an Adjustment Disorder for which applicant is also service connected by the VA. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partially. The Board's Medical Advisor determined that the medical condition partially mitigates the basis of separation. The Board's Medical Advisor opined and there is direct evidence in the active duty and VA medical records that applicant was self-medicating applicant's Adjustment Disorder with alcohol. Given the association between applicant's BH condition and using alcohol to self-medicate, the DUI that led to applicant's separation is partially mitigated. It is noted that applicant's diagnosis of PTSD is related to pre-service trauma that was not incurred or exacerbated as a direct result of applicant's military service. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. The Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member. As a result, the ADRB applied liberal consideration and found that the applicant's Adjustment Disorder outweighed the DUI basis for separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs to be changed to convenience of the government. The Board considered this contention but determined that while the applicant's misconduct was partially mitigated, the applicant's misconduct warranted the current narrative/SPD code of Minor Misconduct/JKN. The partial medical mitigation does not warrant a change to Secretarial Authority because the applicant was involuntarily separated for misconduct, and the applicant's Adjustment Disorder does not excuse or fully mitigate the applicant's responsibility for the misconduct. Therefore, the Board determined that Secretarial Authority, which is exercised sparingly when no other authority is available, is not warranted because the Misconduct (Minor Infractions) narrative is both proper and equitable in this case. (2) The applicant contends good service. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings. In this case, the Board determined that the applicant's Adjustment Disorder outweighs the applicant's DUI basis of separation. (3) The applicant contends an upgrade would allow educational benefits through the GI Bill. The Board 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. (4) The applicant contends an upgrade of the discharge will allow the applicant to obtain better employment. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. (5) The applicant contends completing Occupational Safety and Health Administration 10 training; attaining the Certificate of Fitness for Fire Guard for Torch Operations and Construction Sites (F-60); and, being sober for one year, becoming a better person, spouse, and parent. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. 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. In this case, the Board determined that the applicant's Adjustment Disorder mitigates the DUI basis of separation and warrants an upgrade to Honorable. (6) The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. The Board determined the applicant has a RE-code of "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 the discharge is inequitable based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (Adjustment Disorder diagnosis). 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), with a corresponding separation code of JKN. The Board determined the RE code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because the applicant's Adjustment Disorder outweighed the applicant's misconduct of DUI, the basis of applicant's separation. (2) The Board voted to change the reason for discharge to Misconduct (Minor Infractions) under the same pretexts, thus the reason for discharge is no longer appropriate. The SPD code associated with the new reason for discharge is JKN. (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: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions)/JKN d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a 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 AR20210002983 1