1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 September 2020 b. Date Received: 11 September 2020 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. b. The applicant seeks relief contending in effect, they suffered from undiagnosed post traumatic disorder (PTSD) at the time of separation and would like it to be considered in which the applicant is actively in treatment for and would like their service to be accurately depicted on paper. c. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 20 October 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD diagnoses). 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 current reentry code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 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: 9 July 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 22 May 2018 (2) Basis for Separation: Possession of marijuana (less than an ounce) (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 22 May 2018, the applicant elected to waive their rights to counsel, witnessed by the Trial Defense Service. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 June 2018 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 12 August 2013 / 3-year Reenlistment b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / High School Graduate / 114 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 35F10 Intelligence Analyst / 4 years, 3 months d. Prior Service / Characterizations: NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii / None (4 April 2014 - 4 April 2017) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) On 12 August 2013, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years and 8 months establishing an expiration term of service of 11 April 2017. On 21 January 2016, reenlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years as an E-4, establishing a new ETS of 24 January 2019. (2) The Enlisted Record Brief provides the applicant completed a long overseas tour in Hawaii for 37 months (4 April 2014 to 15 April 2017) and received a Suspension of Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG) which flagged them for a field-initiated elimination (BA). (3) A Bulloch County Sheriff's Report shows on 5 November 2017 the applicant was given two citations for speeding, and possession of marijuana (less than ounce). The applicant was escorted to jail on 6 November 2017 (4) On 13 February 2018, a company commander counseled the applicant on their intent to initiate involuntary separation actions for the following: (a) The applicant was found to be in possession of marijuana during a traffic stop made by the Bulloch County Sherriff's Office on 6 November 2017. The signature page (2 of 2) of the counseling that records whether the applicant agreed/disagreed or provided a statement on their behalf, is missing from the record. (b) Bulloch County sentenced the applicant to 12 months confinement - reduced to probation, 40 hours of community service, and fines of $650.00. Under AR 635-200, Section II, 14-5, provides conditions that subject a Soldier to discharge and reduction in grade, a conviction of over 6 months or more, without regard to suspension or probation, a Soldier will be recommended for reduction in grade and separation initiated. (5) On 22 May 2018, the company commander notified the applicant of their intent to separate them under the provisions of AR635-200, Chapter 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense) and recommended a characterization of an honorable for being found in possession of marijuana during a stop made by the Bullock County police, additionally noting the separation authority is not bound by their recommendation. The same day, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander notification and the basis for the separation. The applicant also completed their election of rights where they waived their right to counsel and elected to submit a statement on their behalf. (a) On 29 May 2018, the applicant submitted a statement through the chain of command in reference to their pending separation, requesting retention on active duty and stated they served honorably for 4 years prior to this short coming and had hopes of becoming a recruiter back home helping youth. They received multiple awards and recognitions for performing above and beyond the call of duty. While in JRTC, they created a basketball court sized terrain model for training which allowed commanders to make better decisions for their troop. They also received an award from the state's Representative in Congress for rendering life-saving aid to a civilian in their neighborhood. (b) They were never convicted of the offense they were charged within a civilian court. They successfully completed the Substance Use Disorder Clinical Care as of 3 May 2018 with no positive urinalysis results since the incident, completed their community service hours mandated by the court as of 9 May 2018, additionally the case will be fully exonerated, and their probation will be completed as of 17 June 2018. They concluded this was a one-time mistake that will not be repeated. (6) On 19 June 2018, the commander submitted the separation action, it provides the commander highly recommended the retention of the applicant to the separation authority, stating they have been a valued asset to the company and has shown great potential since their arrival. From May - December 2017, the applicant took on the role of team leader [directly responsible for Soldier morale and welfare as well as publishing final products for changeover brigs and supporting units outside of the Brigade] for their shift. Following their incident, the applicant worked in the orderly room and shortly assumed the senior position for the training section, effectively increasing the section's proficiency by 20%. The commander concluded that they served honorably and made a mistake believing the applicant has been fully rehabilitated and has the potential to become a great leader, concluding they could use this testimony as their valuable lesson to other at-risk Soldiers. (a) On 25 June 2018, the intermediate commander recommended the applicant be separated with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions). (b) On 26 June 2018, the appropriate authority concurred with the intermediate commander, and approved the separation with a characterization of general (under honorable conditions). (7) On 9 July 2018, the applicant was discharged from the active component accordingly. A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) reflects the applicant completed 5 years, 4 months, and 4 days of net service. The applicant has completed their first full term of service; item 12 (Remarks) is void of a "CONTINUOS HONORABLE SERVICE' statement. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: The applicant provided Department of Veterans Affairs documents, dated 19 August 2020, in effect, the applicant has been awarded a combined 90 percent service-connected disability for which PTSD and cannabis use disorder with obsessive compulsive disorder is 70 percent disabling. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge); Enlisted Record Brief; VA Rating Decision Letter dated 19 August 2020; Article featuring the applicant ('Wayfinder' renders lifesaving aid to Wahiawa resident); Two Third-Party Statements that read as follows: a. On 30 August 2020, provides a statement from SPC (retired) who served with the applicant in the orderly room and considered them to be the most trusted training room clerk. Due to the applicant's maturity, leadership, communication skills, and ability to emulate all Army Values, they were entrusted with leading a squad of soldiers, to produce accurate weekly training slides, process time sensitive paperwork, communicate alongside Battalion and Brigade level officials, organizing Company quarterly training, assisting in preparing and executing promotions, awards, retirements, and reenlistment ceremonies. The applicant additionally spent their free time learning ways to grow both professionally and personally regardless of any adversities. Through their hard work, dedication, and strong military bearing, the applicant exhibited a presence of mind that stood unmatched to their peers. Moreover, the SPC stated they would serve under the applicant's leadership and would trust them with their own family. b. On 8 September 2020, provides a statement from SSG who served with the applicant. SSG states when they met, the applicant was doing Live Environment Training (LET), briefing the G2 COL and LTC; the applicant's products and research was used for multiple training sessions for their upcoming exercise within PACOM. The applicant took care of soldiers on their off time and registered into the Alcohol preventative drivers program helping Soldiers/Sailors/Airmen who were stationed on Schofield Barracks, return home safely after a night out. In January 2017, the applicant showed their strength and character by providing lifesaving first aid to the civilian living in their neighborhood who was viciously attacked by a dog; this in turn helped the EMS workers save the person's leg. This was all over the news and the applicant received praise up to the Commander Major General and earned them a division coin. The applicant was humble and only wanted to be of service to help people. Even when the applicant had setbacks, their mind state was to learn and do better, passing the knowledge on to someone else to help them avoid their mistakes. Concluding, the SSG would work with the applicant again with no questions asked, stating they are a good Soldier and a great asset to the team, and will always have the ability to do better and improve society by being a part of it. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is under the care of the VA for their PTSD. 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), dated 25 September 2019, 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) 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. (2) 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. (3) An 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. (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. 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. Paragraph 14-12c, states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. (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 "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 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. g. Army Regulation 600-85 (Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP)) dated 28 November 2016, provided a comprehensive alcohol and drug abuse prevention and control policies, procedures, and responsibilities for Soldiers for ASAP services. The ASAP is a command program that emphasizes readiness and personal responsibility. The ultimate decision regarding separation or retention of abusers is the responsibility of the Soldier's chain of command. Abuse of alcohol or the use of illicit drugs by military personnel is inconsistent with Army values and the standards of performance, discipline, and readiness necessary to accomplish the Army's mission. (1) Unit commanders must intervene early and refer all Soldiers suspected or identified as alcohol and/or drug abusers to the ASAP. The unit commander should recommend enrollment based on the Soldier's potential for continued military service in terms of professional skills, behavior, and potential for advancement. (2) ASAP participation is mandatory for all Soldiers who are command referred. Failure to attend a mandatory counseling session may constitute a violation of Article 86 (Absence Without Leave) of the UCMJ. (3) Alcohol and/or other drug abusers, and in some cases dependent alcohol users, may be enrolled in the ASAP when such enrollment is clinically recommended. Soldiers who fail to participate adequately in, or to respond successfully to, rehabilitation will be processed for administrative separation and not be provided another opportunity for rehabilitation except under the most extraordinary circumstances, as determined by the Clinical Director in consultation with the unit commander. h. All Soldiers who are identified as drug abusers, without exception, will be referred to the ASAP counseling center for screening; be considered for disciplinary action under the UCMJ, as appropriate; and be processed for administrative separation in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200. i. Title 38, U.S. Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge, or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency. j. Army Regulation 635-8 (Separation Processing and Documents) prescribes policy and procedures regarding separation documents, it states in the preparation of the DD Form 214 for soldiers who have previously reenlisted without being issued a DD Form 214 and are separated with any characterization of service except "Honorable," enter in item 18 (Remarks) "Continuous Honorable Active Service From (first day of service which DD Form 214 was not issued) until (date before commencement of current enlistment). k. Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2016 Edition) stated, military law consists of the statutes governing the military establishment and regulations issued thereunder, the constitutional powers of the President and regulations issued thereunder, and the inherent authority of military commanders. Military law includes jurisdiction exercised by courts-martial and the jurisdiction exercised by commanders with respect to nonjudicial punishment. The purpose of military law is to promote justice, to assist in maintaining good order and discipline in the Armed Forces. Article 112a (Wrongful Use, Possession, etc., of Controlled Substances) stated in subparagraph e (Maximum Punishment) the wrongful use, possession, manufacture, or introduction of controlled substance, to include cocaine the maximum punishment consists of a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement 2 years. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): Standard of Review. The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. a. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. A review of the records provides administrative irregularity in the proper retention of official military records, specifically, the referral to ASAP for the required two-part mandatory clinical assessment, required within 4 days of the first positive urinalysis; although the applicant was confined, we are unable to determine if part of the other requirements to their probation was ASAP or not. (1) The available evidence provides the applicant successfully completed their first term of service. During a traffic stop for speeding they were found with less than an ounce of marijuana which resulted in 12 months of confinement which was reduced to probation, 40 hours of community service, and fines of $650, which resulted in them being discharged under provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense). (2) In pertinent part, while undergoing the separation process the applicant submitted a statement on their behalf identifying their honorable service, their success in completing their sentence, accolades on and off duty, and requested to be retained. Notwithstanding the separation approvals final determination, the immediate commander provided an overview of the applicant's performance indicating they believed the applicant was rehabilitated and recommended the applicant be retained or receive an honorable discharge upon separation, although, rehabilitative requirements are not applicable to an action of this nature. (3) The applicant received a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service rather than an under other than honorable conditions which is normally considered appropriate. They completed 1 year, 9 months, and 15 days of their 3-year reenlistment contractual obligation prior to the misconduct that led to their discharge. (4) The remarks item of their DD Form 214 does not provide the required honorable service statement according to 635-8, which provides Soldiers who have previously reenlisted without being issued a DD Form 214 and are separated with any characterization of service except "Honorable," enter in item 18 (Remarks) "CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE" From (first day of service which DD Form 214 was not issued) until (date before commencement of current enlistment). b. AR 635-200, Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense and convictions by civil authorities. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharge under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record. c. Published Department of Defense guidance indicates that the guidance is not intended to interfere or impeded on the Board's statutory independence. The Board will determine the relative weight of the action that led to the discharge and whether it supports relief or not. In reaching its determination, the Board shall consider the applicant's petition, available records and/or submitted documents in support of the petition. 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 diagnosis: PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. Per applicant's assertion trauma symptoms began in-service. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that given the nexus between trauma and substance use, the basis for separation is mitigated. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? Yes. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the applicant's PTSD outweighed the possession of marijuana basis for separation for the aforementioned reason. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends they suffered from undiagnosed PTSD at the time of separation. The Board determined that this contention was valid and voted to upgrade the characterization of service due to PTSD mitigating the applicant's misconduct of possession of marijuana. (2) The applicant contends the charges were exonerated from their record effective 17 June 2018 and should be accurately depicted for their service and not their mistake. The applicant did not submit evidence of this in support of their petition. The Board considered this contention, the applicant's record of service, the nature of the misconduct and the applicant's PTSD diagnosis and found it outweighed the applicant's misconduct and voted to grant relief. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, the circumstances surrounding the discharge (PTSD diagnoses). 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 current reentry 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 PTSD mitigated the applicant's misconduct of possession of marijuana. The Board found sufficient evidence of in-service mitigating factors and concurred with the conclusion of the medical advising official that the applicant's PTSD does outweigh the misconduct. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (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 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 AR20210009670 1