1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 27 January 2020 b. Date Received: 26 July 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant's Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests a character of service upgrade to honorable, change of separation code, reentry code and the narrative reason. The applicant would like the ability to reenlist. (1) The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, 8 years in the U.S. Army with zero negative remarks or actions, being promoted to staff sergeant/E-6 within 7 years of service and countless awards and coins from personnel ranging from lieutenant colonel all the way up to lieutenant general for commendable service. They had 33 months total deployment time, every deployment they were given tasks far exceeding the rank and normal job scope and completed these tasks with recognition. (2) Mid-way through a deployment, the applicant found out that their spouse was cheating and wanted a divorce. This hit the applicant hard and they almost turned to suicide. Their depression from a pending divorce and amplified Post-Traumatic-Stress Disorder (PTSD), they started to drink heavily after the deployment and received a driving under the influence charge. This lead to their negative counseling statements, general officer memorandum of reprimand (GOMOR) and two nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 4 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, to include combat 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 reentry code was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct, (Serious Offense), Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 8 May 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 February 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: * on 14 June 2013 wrongfully drove a vehicle under the influence of alcohol * on 2 August 2013, wrongfully disobeyed a lawful order from a commissioned officer * on 8 August 2013 and 23 August 2013, wrongfully disobeyed a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (NCO) * on 29 October 2013 and 19 November 2013, wrongfully failed to report to the appointed place of duty. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 14 April 2014 (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 14 April 2014, the applicant waived consideration of the case before an administrative separation board. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 5 May 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 14 December 2011 / 3 years, 9 months The applicant extended their 3 year enlistment for 9 months. b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 111 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: Staff Sergeant/E-6 / 25U20 Signal Support System Specialist / 8 years, 10 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (15 August 2006 - 3 November 2007; 15 October 2009 - 26 June 2010); Afghanistan (4 September 2012 - 7 June 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM-3, AAM, MUC-2, VUA, AGCM-2, NDSM, GWTSM, ICM-3CS, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: 1 August 2009 - 31 July 2010 / Fully Capable 1 August 2010 - 1 February 2011 / Among the Best 2 February 2011 - 1 February 2012 / Fully Capable 2 February 2012 - 1 February 2013 / Fully Capable 2 February 2013 - 1 February 2014 / Marginal h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: (1) A DA Form 3975 (Military Police Report), dated 14 June 2013, shows the applicant as the subject with the offenses of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, motor vehicle liability insurance, criminal use of weapons, and speeding. Section VII (Narrative) states the applicant was arrested by civilian authorities for speeding, no proof of insurance, driving under the influence, and carrying in a concealed [weapon]. (2) On 6 August 2013, the applicant was reprimanded in writing by the Commanding General, Headquarters, 1st Infantry Division and Fort Riley, for driving under the influence of alcohol on 14 June 2013. (3) A memorandum, 41st Engineer Company, 1st Engineer Battalion, subject: Command Directive to Administer Breathalyzer Test on [Applicant], dated 23 August 2013, reflects a request for a Command Directed Breathalyzer Test be administered to [Applicant]. The applicant was not at the appointed place of duty and upon arrival at their appointed place of duty, they admitted to drinking until being blacked out. They are currently enrolled in Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP). (4) A DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ) reflects that applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment on 18 October 2013 for failing to obey a lawful command from a superior commission officer, between on or about 4 July 2013 and on or about 2 August 2013 and two specifications of failing to obey a lawful order from an NCO on or about 8 August 2013 and on or about 23 August 2013. The applicant's punishment consisted of a reduction to the rank/grade of sergeant/E-5, forfeiture of $1,446.00 pay, extra duty for 45 days and an oral reprimand. In the applicant's memorandum, subject: Article 15 Mitigation and Extenuation, dated 16 October 2013, they state the circumstances and situations that arose affecting their morale and judgment. (5) A DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ) reflects the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment on 12 December 2013 for failing to go to the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty, on or about 19 November 2013. The applicant's punishment consisted of a reduction to the rank/grade of specialist/E-4, forfeiture of $600.00 pay for 2 months, extra duty for 10 days and an oral reprimand. In the applicant's memorandum, subject: Article 15 Mitigation and Extenuation, dated 11 December 2013, they state they accept full responsibility for missing formation because he took sleep medication. Additionally, the applicant states their part (6) The applicant's NCO Evaluation Report covering the period 2 May 2013 through 1 February 2014 shows in: * Part IV (Army Values/Attributes/Skills/Action) - the rater marked "NO" for "Duty" and "Integrity" and commented "failed to set the example as an NCO" * Part IVd (Leadership) - the rater marked "Needs Improvement (Some)" and commented - "received verbal and written counseling for insubordination and unprofessional behavior on several occasions" and "failed to portray a positive image for Soldiers to emulate * Part IVf (Responsibility & Accountability) - the rater marked "Needs Improvement (Some)" and commented - "received multiple nonjudicial punishments for failing to report" * Part V (Overall Performance and Potential) - his rater marked "Marginal" for the applicant's overall potential * Part Vc (Senior Rater Bullet Comments) -senior rater bullet comments consisted of - o do not promote to staff sergeant o do not send to any military schools o performance as a Company Signal Support NCO is not commensurate with rank o no longer posses the attributes and needed to constitute [applicant] as a contributing member of the team; remove from positions of responsibility immediately (7) The Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) provides numerous negative Developmental Forms between 3 July 2013 to 19 November 2013, for indiscipline to include but not limited to failure to be at appointed place of duty. The AMHRR is void of required ASAP documents aside from the nonjudicial punishment response from the applicant dated 11 December 2013, indicating they were enrolled in ASAP. (8) A memorandum, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Engineer Battalion, Fort Riley, KS, subject: Separation under the Provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, (Commission of Serious Offense) [Applicant]), dated 10 February 2014, notified the applicant of initiating actions for separation for commission of serious offenses; wrongfully drove a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, willfully disobeyed a lawful order from a commissioned officer and on two occasions wrongfully disobeyed a lawful order from a NCO. The applicant acknowledge receipt of notification that same day. (9) A DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 6 February 2014, reflects the applicant has the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, can appreciate the difference between right and wrong and meets the retention requirements. The Social Worker stated - a. An Axis I diagnosis of Occupational Problems with Alcohol Dependence. b. The applicant has been screened for PTSD and tested positive. The condition is either not present or if present does not meet the criteria for a medical evaluation board. c. It is the professional opinion of the undersigned that the applicant will not respond to command efforts at rehabilitation (such as transfer, disciplinary action or reclassification), or to any behavioral health treatment methods currently available to the military. d. The applicant has been screened for substance use disorder (i.e., alcohol and drugs). The applicant has diagnosis of alcohol dependence by Army Substance Abuse Program and is currently enrolled in their program. e. No psychiatric issues were identified which would preclude Chapter processing. The applicant is psychiatrically cleared for administrative chapter and action deemed appropriate by Command. The applicant is currently going through a Medical Board process at this time. (10) Headquarters, 1st Infantry Division and Fort Riley, memorandum (Separation under the Provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c, (Commission of Serious Offense) [Applicant]), 5 May 2014, the approving authority directed the applicant will be separated from the Army prior to the expiration of current term of service and the applicant's service will be characterized as General under honorable conditions. (11) On 8 May 2014, the applicant was discharged accordingly, the DD Form 214 provides the applicant completed 8 years, 10 months, and 11 days of net active service this period. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: MSE/BHE as described in previous paragraph 4h(8). (2) AMHRR Listed: MSE/BHE as described in previous paragraph 4h(8). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: * DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge) * four DA Forms 2166-8 (NCO Evaluation Report) * 16 DA Forms 4856 (Developmental Counseling Forms) * excerpts from interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System, Case Files Approved Separation * Army Good Conduct Medal (2nd Award) Permanent Order 229-12 * two Course Graduation Diplomas * two DA Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) * 41st Engineer Company, 1st Engineer Battalion Memorandum (Command Directed to Administer Breathalyzer Test on [Applicant]), with Alcohol Test Form result * Headquarters, 1st Infantry Division and Fort Riley Memorandum (GOMOR), with Filing Determination * DA Form 4126-R (Bar to Reenlistment Certificate) * Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Riley Memorandum (Official Notification - Suspension of Installation Driving Privileges), with Acknowledge Receipt of Notification * Headquarters, 1st Engineer Battalion Memorandum (Notification of Administrative Reduction) * two DA Forms 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ), with Applicant's Memorandum (Article 15 Mitigation and Extenuation) * two Letters of Recommendation * DA Form 3340-R (Request for Reenlistment or Extension in the Regular Army) * DA Form 1695 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment) 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with application. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1553, (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, Title 10, U.S. Code, section 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 (DoD) 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 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; Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1553; and DoD Directive 1332.41 and DoD Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), dated 6 September 2011, provided 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) Chapter 14 (Separation for Misconduct) 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. 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 (Commission of a Service Offense), 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. (4) Chapter 15 (Secretarial Authority), currently in effect, 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 (The Army Substance Abuse Program) , in effect at the time, states Alcohol abuse and resulting misconduct will not be condoned. On-duty impairment due to alcohol consumption will not be tolerated. Impairment of Soldiers is defined as having a blood alcohol content equal to or greater than .05 grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood; Unit commanders that identify Soldiers who have abused alcohol must refer them within 5 working days for screening, education/training and/or rehabilitation as necessary. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): a. The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by DoD Instruction 1332.28. b. A Review of official records provides the applicant was deployed on three occasions, serving in Afghanistan for 9 months and twice in Iraq, with their first tour being 15 months and the second tour being 9 months long. The applicant completed their first enlistment period honorably, successfully completing noncommissioned officer educations schools and promotion to a noncommissioned officer, SGT/E5. At some point, after their first enlistment they extended their contractual obligation for 3 years and 9 months successfully and is void of indiscipline. c. The applicant's AMHRR provided a multitude of counseling for indiscipline over their career timeline, to include while serving in a theater of operations. However, their immediate commander separated them for commission of serious offenses; specifically, wrongfully drove a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, willfully disobeyed a lawful order from a commissioned officer and on two occasions wrongfully disobeyed a lawful order from an NCO. d. The evidence shows the applicant received a general discharge rather than a discharge under other than honorable conditions, which is normally considered appropriate. e. With regard to the applicant's use of alcohol: (1) Army policy, at the time, required commanders to refer Soldiers for Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) screening when a Soldier was identified as abusing alcohol. The AMHRR shows the applicant was determined to be drunk on duty. In their memorandum, subject: Mitigation and Extenuation for Article 15 Defense, dated 11 December 2013, they participated in the ASAP, and they were pending a Chapter 9 (Alcohol or Other Drug Abuse Rehabilitation Failure) discharge form the U.S. Army for ASAP failure. (2) In 1995, change 2 of AR 600-85 (ADAPCP) stated commanders were to consider separating Soldiers who had been involved in serious incidents of alcohol-related misconduct; examples of such misconduct included repetitive instances of being drunk on duty and/or driving while drunk. f. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separation 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 discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record. d. Neither the applicant nor the AMHRR provide documentation of a PTSD diagnosis. 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: the applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder in-service. Post-service, the applicant is service connected for combat related PTSD. (2) Did the condition exist, or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder 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, substance use, avoidance, and difficulty with authority, 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 basis for separation for the aforementioned reasons. b. Response to Contention(s): The applicant did not make any contentions or provide any evidence to support that the discharge was improper or inequitable. The Board reviewed all available evidence and determined that no relief was warranted at this time. c. The Board determined the discharge is inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat 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 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 DUI, disobeying a lawful order from a commissioned officer and noncommission officer, and failure to report. 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 AR20210016986 1