1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 2 March 2021 b. Date Received: 3 March 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 under other than honorable conditions. The applicant requests, an upgrade to honorable, change the RE code to "1," and narrative reason to "Convenience of the government." The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant did not receive the treatment the applicant needed regarding PTSD and TBI which led to self-medication (synthetic marijuana) for undertreated and misdiagnosed PTSD and TBI (see exhibits 4, 10, and 11). While trying to seek proper care for the applicant's PTSD and TBI, the applicant endured several months of receiving $0.00 pay a pay period until separation in November 2012 because the Army overpaid the applicant (see exhibit 12). Other than the three instances of misconduct, the applicant served the applicant's entire enlistment honorably by receiving a combat action badge, an Army Good Conduct Medal, and passing the sergeant's promotion recommendation board with a high score. Prior to deployment the applicant had no medical or mental health problems (see exhibit 1). In the last weeks of the 12-month deployment on 8 June 2010, the applicant was wounded as the result of enemy indirect fire (see exhibit 2). If the board approves the applicant's request for relief, the applicant will be able to establish care with the VA and regain GI Bill benefits. The applicant further details the contentions in two allied self-authored statements provided with the application. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 13 October 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to General 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 also voted to change the RE code to RE-3. 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: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 21 November 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date and Charges Preferred (DD Form 458, Charge Sheet): On 20 September 2012, the applicant was charged with: Charge I: Violating Article 92, UCMJ, for: Specification 1: Wrongfully carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle while on Joint Base Lewis-McChord on or about 29 June 2012. Specification 2: Wrongfully possessing Spice on or about 29 June 2012. Charge II: Violating Article 134, UCMJ, for unlawfully carrying of a loaded pistol on or about 29 June 2012. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 9 October 2012 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 November 2012 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 August 2007 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / High School Graduate / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 25U10, Signal Support System Specialist / 5 years, 3 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (23 July 2009 - 17 June 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-2, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR, OSR, CAB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c (1). The applicant provided exhibit 9 - CID Report of Investigation - Initial Final, date not specified, shows on 4 September 2011, a noncommissioned officer reported a package of spice was discovered in the applicant's barracks room. An investigation established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of failure to obey a general order when the applicant consumed spice in the applicant's barracks room and hid the remaining spice in the applicant's coffee machine, which was subsequently discovered during a probable cause inspection of the applicant's barracks room. A DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ dated 22 September 2011, shows the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for, on or about 31 July 2011, wrongful use and possess Spice. Their punishment consisted of a reduction to the rank/grade of private /E-1, forfeiture of $733.00 per month for 2 months, and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Memorandum, Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, 9 October 2012, shows the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. Memorandum, Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, 1 November 2012, shows the separation authority approved the request for discharge with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief, 16 November 2012, shows the applicant was flagged for involuntary separation/field initiated (BA), effective 19 October 2012 and drug abuse adverse action (UA), effective 2 July 2012; was ineligible for reenlistment due to pending separation (9V). The Assignment Eligibility Availability (AEA) code shows AEA code "L" which has no assignment restrictions. The applicant was reduced from E-4 to E-1 effective 22 September 2011. FLAGS / AEA codes: BA, UA / L RE/Prohibition code: 9V i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Exhibit 4 - On 28 June 2010, the applicant was seen by a psychology intern. The applicant scored a 44 on the PCL-C and was given a provisional diagnosis of adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features. It was recommended that the applicant order a free relaxation MP3 from military one source and incorporate it as part of a sleep hygiene intervention. Exhibit 10 - Report of Mental Status Evaluation, 22 September 2011, shows the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings; could appreciate the difference between right and wrong; and met medical retention requirements. The applicant had been screened for PTSD and mild TBI with positive results. The conditions were either not present or did not meet AR 40-501 criteria for a medical evaluation board. The command was advised to consider the influence of these conditions. The applicant was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with depressed mood, cannabis dependence. Exhibit 11 - In December 2011, the applicant was seen by a psychologist. The primary care manager (PCM) prescribed the applicant Prozac. Later in the month, the applicant informed the PCM that the Prozac did not have any effect on the applicant. The PCM states the applicant was depressed and to follow up with the PCM to evaluate efficacy and possible dosage adjustment. Exhibit 15 - On 23 February 2021, the applicant submitted a VA claim for TBI and PTSD, however in an e-mail received on 28 September 2023, the applicant states the VA claim was denied. (2) AMHRR Listed: None. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online DD Form 293; DD Form 214; two self-authored statements; exhibits 1-15; enlisted record brief; three third party statements; applicant email. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Currently works as a hotel general manager and is certified as a hotel administrator and hospitality department trainer. Previously worked as a business development manager, district manager, business development, and U-Haul area manager. 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 PTSD, 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 635-40, paragraph 4-3f(1), states enlisted Soldiers who are approved for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial are ineligible for referral to the MEB and PEB phases of the DES (see AR 635-200). If the Soldier is in the DES process, the applicant's DES case will be terminated, and the Soldier is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. e. 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) Paragraph 3-7c states Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is an administrative separation from the Service under conditions other than honorable and it may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial based on certain circumstances or patterns of behavior or acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. (5) Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. (6) Paragraph 10-8a stipulates a discharge under other than honorable conditions normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record during the current enlistment. (See chap 3, sec II.) (7) Paragraph 10b stipulates Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper. (8) 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. f. 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 "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. g. 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: (1) 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. (2) 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. (3) 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 an upgrade to honorable, change the RE code to "1," and narrative reason to "Convenience of the government." The applicant's AMHRR, the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows the applicant served 5 years, 3 months, and 21 days during which the applicant served 11 months deployed to Iraq. The applicant suffers from an explosion that took place in Iraq on 8 June 2010. On 9 October 2012, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial after charges were preferred against the applicant for wrongfully carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle while on Joint Base Lewis- McChord, wrongfully possessing Spice, and unlawfully carrying of a loaded pistol. The evidence in the applicant's AMHRR confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel, voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and indicated an understanding an under other than honorable conditions discharge could be received, and the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. The applicant requests the narrative reason for the discharge to be changed to "Convenience of the government." The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial," and the separation code is "KFS." 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 requests a RE code change to "1." 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 states prior to deployment the applicant had no medical or mental health problems. The applicant provided exhibit 1, pre-deployment health assessment, showing the applicant was in very good health. The applicant states in the last weeks of the 12-month deployment on 8 June 2010, the applicant was wounded as a result of enemy indirect fire. The applicant provided exhibit 2 showing the applicant was seen at the Theater Clinic for a shrapnel wound of the head and anisocoria because of an explosion. The applicant contends, in effect, the applicant did not receive the treatment the applicant needed regarding PTSD and TBI which led to self-medication (synthetic marijuana) for undertreated and misdiagnosed PTSD and TBI. The applicant provided the following exhibits: Exhibit 4 - On 28 June 2010, the applicant was seen by a psychology intern. The applicant scored a 44 on the PCL-C and was given a provisional diagnosis of adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features. It was recommended that the applicant order a free relaxation MP3 from military one source and incorporate it as part of a sleep hygiene intervention. Exhibit 10 - Report of Mental Status Evaluation, 22 September 2011, shows the applicant screened positive for PTSD and mild TBI. The applicant was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with depressed mood; cannabis dependence. Exhibit 11 - In December 2011, the applicant was seen by a psychologist. The PCM prescribed the applicant Prozac. Later in the month, the applicant informed the PCM that the Prozac did not have any effect on the applicant. The PCM states the applicant was depressed and to follow up with the PCM to evaluate efficacy and possible dosage adjustment. The applicant contends, in effect, while trying to seek proper care for the applicant's PTSD and TBI, the applicant endured several months of receiving $0.00 pay a pay period until separation in November 2012 because the Army overpaid the applicant (see exhibit 12). The applicant provided two Leave and Earnings Statements for March and April 2012 showing the end of month pay as $.00. The remarks block shows the debt was because of several military pay allowance debts, a cancelled check, and a debt to the AAFES/NEX Card, in addition the applicant had allotments. The applicant contends, in effect, other than the three instances of misconduct, the applicant served the applicant's entire enlistment honorably by receiving a combat action badge, an Army Good Conduct Medal including other awards, and passing the sergeant's promotion board recommendation with a high score. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends an upgrade would allow VA care and GI Bill benefits. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include the Montgomery GI Bill benefits 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 is currently working as a hotel general manager and is certified as a hotel administrator and hospitality department trainer. The applicant previously worked as a business development manager, district manager, U-Haul area manager, and in business development. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. 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. The third-party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. One statement recognizes the applicant's many senior job positions and good conduct after leaving the Army. 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: Depressive Disorder (note-the diagnoses of Adjustment DO with mixed emotional features and Adjustment DO with depressed mood are subsumed under the diagnosis of Depressive DO. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found medical treatment records document the diagnosis of Depressive DO. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Partial. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that that the applicant has a BH condition, Depression, which mitigates some of his misconduct. (Note- the diagnoses of Adjustment DO with mixed emotional features and Adjustment DO with depressed mood are both subsumed under the diagnosis of depression). As there is an association between Depression and self-medication with illicit drugs, there is a nexus between this condition and the applicant's wrongful use of Spice. The applicant's diagnosis of Depression does not mitigate the offense of bringing a loaded weapon onto base as this condition does not affect one's ability to distinguish right from wrong and act in accordance with the right. Of note, the applicant self- asserts PTSD and TBI. Review of the medical records indicate that he did not meet criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD while on active duty. Regarding his report of mild TBI, further evaluation indicated he had no TBI residuals (i.e., no cognitive issues, no problems with memory, no headaches, etc.) and did not require a referral to Neuropsychology for further assessment. These facts notwithstanding, under liberal consideration, the applicant's self-assertion of these conditions warrants consideration by the board. (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 applicant's offense of bringing a loaded weapon onto base as this condition does not affect one's ability to distinguish right from wrong and act in accordance with the right. b. Prior Decisions Cited: N/A c. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends, in effect, the applicant did not receive the treatment the applicant needed regarding PTSD and TBI which led to self-medication (synthetic marijuana) for undertreated and misdiagnosed PTSD and TBI. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to the association between Depression and self-medication with illicit drugs, there is a nexus between this condition and the applicant's wrongful use of Spice. (2) The applicant contends, in effect, while trying to seek proper care for the applicant's PTSD and TBI, the applicant endured several months of receiving $0.00 pay a pay period until separation in November 2012 because the Army overpaid the applicant (see exhibit 12). The Board considered this contention and determined that the applicant's specific issue does not mitigate the applicant's offenses as the Army affords many avenues to Soldier's including seeking separation for hardship. (3) The applicant contends, in effect, other than the three instances of misconduct, the applicant served the applicant's entire enlistment honorably by receiving a combat action badge, an Army Good Conduct Medal including other awards, and passing the sergeant's promotion board recommendation with a high score. The Board considered this contention and found that the applicant's service, given the nature of the misconduct, including possession and use of Spice and unlawfully carrying a loaded firearm offense were not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) The applicant contends an upgrade would allow VA care and GI Bill benefits. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to the association between the applicant's depression and self medication with illicit drugs. d. The Board determined to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to General 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 also voted to change the RE code to RE-3. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address further 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. e. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service because the Board found sufficient evidence of in-service mitigating factors (Length, Quality, Combat), to include post service accomplishments, and concurred with the conclusion of the medical advising official that the applicant's depression does outweigh the applicant's wrongful possession and use of Spice and unlawfully carrying a loaded firearm offense. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the reason for the applicant's separation and the character of service the applicant received upon separation were inequitable. The Board determined that an upgrade to HD was not warranted due to the seriousness of the unlawfully carrying a loaded firearm offense. The Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to General and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12a. (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 Board voted to change the RE code to RE-3. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: Misconduct (Minor Infractions)/JKN d. Change RE Code to: RE-3 e. Change Authority to: AR 635-200 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 AR20210006562 1