IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	29 May 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130001980
___________________________________________________________________________

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 both 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 from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that after his discharge, he was diagnosed with PTSD, TBI and other medical conditions.  He has been unable to care for himself and feels he should not be penalized.  He wants to attend college and improve his job opportunities.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		7 January 2013
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			10 February 2010
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, Chapter 9,                						AR 635-200, JPD, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:			515th Engineer Co, Fort Leonard Wood, MO
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	15 November 2007, 3 years and 18 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	2 years, 2 months, 26 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 2 months, 26 days
i. Time Lost:				None 
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	21B10, Combat Engineer
m. GT Score:				121
n. Education:				One year of college
o. Overseas Service:			SWA
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (080502-090706)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, NDSM, ICM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		None
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 November 2007 for a period of 3 years and 18 weeks.  He was 21 years old at the time he joined the Army and had 1 year of college.  He served a combat tour in Iraq and when his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Leonard Wood, MO.  His record shows he received an ARCOM award.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  The applicant’s service record does not contain all the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army.  The unit commander’s notification of intent to separate him from the Army is not in the record.  However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature.  

2.  On 5 February 2010, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

3.  The record also shows that on 3 February 2010, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted a statement on his own behalf (NIF).

4.  The DD Form 214 indicates that on 10 February 2010, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, for alcohol rehabilitation failure, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  The DD Form 214 also shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JPD and a reentry (RE) code of 4.  

5.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

There are no UCMJ actions or any negative counseling’s

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

The applicant provided documentation from the Veterans Administration with a disability rating of 80 percent, DD Form 214 and copy of congressional correspondence.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY  

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel and outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse.  

2.  A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for alcohol or drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical.  

3.  Army policy states that an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service.  However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process.

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 record of service, his military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The only pertinent evidence available for review regarding the applicant's discharge is the separation authority’s approval memorandum and the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which was authenticated by the applicant.  The DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, for alcohol rehabilitation failure. 

3.  For this type of discharge, the applicant would have been enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) and would have been aware of the consequences of any action which would demonstrate any inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program.  Inasmuch as the applicant's official record is void of the circumstances leading to his discharge, it is presumed that he was identified as a rehabilitation failure subsequent to his enrollment in the ASAP program.  Therefore, it is also presumed that the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems, and chose not to avail himself of this opportunity. 

4.  The applicant contends the Veterans Administration has granted him a service connected disability for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and TBI.  The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity.  The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command

5.  If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the complete discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record.

6.  The applicant also contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill and better future job endeavors.  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.  Further, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

7.  Therefore, based on the available evidence and the government presumption of regularity, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service are both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief. 

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review		Date:  29 May 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:	No Change
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					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 Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20130001980		

Page 5 of 5 pages




ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1