IN THE CASE OF:	Mr.

      BOARD DATE:  	2 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130004937
___________________________________________________________________________

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 was 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 to upgrade his characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he never wanted to be discharged from the military.  He was a good soldier, even after being in trouble.  He won the Soldier of the month board.  He should have received many more good conduct medals from winning the board, and excelling in inspections by the battalion commander and battalion sergeant major.  He completed his first enlistment and was deployed to Macedonia and Kosovo.  He is back in school now with a few months left.  He did not know he would not be offered educational benefits.  He does not want to continue with a general discharge on his record when he feels like he served honorably.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

	a.	Application Receipt Date:	11 March 2013 
	b.	Discharge Received:	General, Under Honorable Conditions 
	c.	Date of Discharge:	10 February 2003 
	d.	Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12b, JKA, 
			RE-3
	e.	Unit of assignment:	Co D, 2nd Bn, 29th Infantry Regiment, Fort Benning, 
			GA
	f.	Current Enlistment Date/Term:	13 June 2001, 2 years
	g.	Current Enlistment Service:	1 year, 7 months, 28 days
	h.	Total Service:	4 years, 2 months, 29 days
	i.	Time Lost:	None
	j.	Previous Discharges:  	RA (981112-010612), HD
	k.	Highest Grade Achieved:	E-4 
	l.	Military Occupational Specialty:	11C10, Indirect Fire Infantryman 
	m.	GT Score:	101 
	n.	Education:	GED 
	o.	Overseas Service:	Germany  
	p.	Combat Service:	None 
	q.	Decorations/Awards:	AGCM; NDSM; ASR; OSR
	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 12 November 1998, and reenlisted on 13 June 2001, for a period of 2 years.  He was 18 years old at the time of entry and had a high school equivalency (GED).  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11C10, Indirect Fire Infantryman.  His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  He completed 4 years, 2 months, and 29 days of active duty service.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 19 December 2002, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of pattern of misconduct, specifically for DUI and driving with suspended driving privileges.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge, and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 22 January 2003, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and did not submit a statement on his own 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 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 28 January 2003, 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 from the Army on 10 February 2003, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12b, AR 635-200, for misconduct, a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKA and an RE code of 3. 

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Article 15, dated 16 December 2002, disobeying a commissioned officer, the brigade commander (021116).  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $552 per month for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction, (FG). 

2.  Supplementary Action under Article 15, dated 30 December 2002, failing to be at appointed place of duty (021219).  The suspended punishment consisting of forfeiture of $552 per month for two months was vacated. 

3.  Six negative counseling statements dated between 20 August 2002 and 19 November 2002, for being apprehended for DUI; disobeying his commander; consuming alcohol when told not to; being indebted; driving on suspended license; disobeying order or regulation; and failing to be at his appointed place of duty.  

4.  A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 16 August 2002, for driving while intoxicated.

5.  An MP Report, dated 11 August 2002, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for DUI.  

6.  Civil court document, dated 15 November 2002, that indicates the applicant being placed on probation for 12 months.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided no further evidence. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states, in effect, he is currently enrolled in school.  

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 record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army standards for acceptable conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  The applicant by violating the Army's policy not to abuse alcohol compromised the special trust and confidence placed in a Soldier.  The applicant, as Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army's alcohol abuse policies.  By abusing alcohol and committing several incidents of misconduct, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge.  

3.  The applicant contends that he had good service which included completing his first enlistment, being recognized as Soldier of the Month, excelling in inspections, and serving in Macedonia and Kosovo.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge as shown by the repeated incidents of misconduct or by the multiple negative counseling statements and the documented actions under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

4.  The applicant contends that since leaving the Army he has been back in school with a few months left.  The applicant’s post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, it appears that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  

5.  The applicant contends he did not realize he would not be offered educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill.  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.

6.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

7.  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:  2 October 2013      Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
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	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions

ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130004937

Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1