IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	3 APRIL 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20120020881
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.




      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the action that led to his discharge was the only act of misconduct he had in his 3 years and 8 months of service which included two combat deployments and his achieving the rank of Sergeant.

3.  He would like to enroll in college to pursue a career in law enforcement.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		8 November 2012
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			4 May 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 14-12c 						JKQ, RE-3        
e. Unit of assignment:			B Co, 1st Bn, 506th IN Regiment, Fort Campbell, KY
f. Enlistment Date/Term:		6 November 2009, 6 years (NIF)
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 5 months, 29 days
h. Total Service:			3 years, 11 months, 28 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA 080507-091105/HD 
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-5	
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	11B20, Infantry
m. GT Score:				100
n. Education:				GED
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (081214-091214), Afghanistan (101202-110814)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM-2, AAM, AGCM, ICM-2, ACM-2, NDSM 						GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR-2
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes	
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 May 2008, he was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  On 6 November 2009, he reenlisted for a period of 6 years (per unit commander), and at the time his discharge proceedings were initiated he was serving at Fort Campbell, KY.  He had several awards which included two ARCOMs, an AAM and an AGCM.  He served combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and achieved the rank of Sergeant.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The record shows that on 11 April 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for driving recklessly while under the influence of alcohol and in possession of a concealed weapon (110205).  

2.  The unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.  

3.  On 12 April 2012, the applicant provided an election of rights statement in which he indicated he had been afforded the opportunity to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not submit a statement on his behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  An undated memo from the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5.  The applicant was discharged on 4 May 2012, for misconduct (serious offense), under the provisions of Chapter 14-12c, with a SPD code of JKQ and a RE code of 3.

6.  The service record shows no lost time.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  The record does not show any actions under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

2.  One negative counseling dated 14 February 2012, for driving under the influence (DUI).  

3.  A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 19 March 2012 for DUI.

4.  An Academic Evaluation Report (120103-120127), NCOA, achieved course standards.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

None provided with the application.



POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states that he is pursuing a law enforcement career.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY

1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.   

2.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’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.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s service record and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.   The applicant contends the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career.  However, even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. 

3.  By regulation, a UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct.  It appears the applicant’s generally good record of service was the basis for his receiving a GD instead of the normal UOTHC discharge.  His record was marred by an offense of driving recklessly while intoxicated and was also in possession of a concealed weapon.   

4.  Finally, the applicant desires to use the benefits of the GI Bill for college and pursue a law enforcement career.  However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

5.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review	  Date: 3 April 2013    Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Board Vote:
Character  	Change:  1	No Change:  4
Reason	Change:  0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:	No
Change Characterization to: NA	
Change Reason to:	NA
Change RE Code to: NA	
Grade Restoration to: NA	
Change Authority for Separation:	NA





Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTH - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20120020881

5



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1