IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	25 September 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006032
___________________________________________________________________________

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 an upgrade of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he received two DUI’s (6 November 2009 and 27 December 2010), and both charges were dropped by the court.  He contends that he served two deployments between the DUIs and was later diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) by the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA).
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			18 October 2012
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				22 June 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200
Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:				F Co, 2-7th Infantry Regiment, 1st HBCT, 3rd ID
Fort Stewart, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		26 October 2006, 3 years, 25 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:		4 years, 7 months, 27 days
h. Total Service:				4 years, 7 months, 27 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		91J10, Quartermaster and Chemical
Equipment Repairer
m. GT Score:					92
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				Iraq (091217-101209 / 070305-080515)
q. Decorations/Awards:			ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-w/2CS 
GWOTSM, OSR-2nd Award, AMUA
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 26 October 2006 for a period of 3 years and 25 weeks.  He was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  The applicant’s record indicates he served two tours in Iraq.  He earned several awards to include an ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, GWOTSM, ICM w/2 CS, OSR (2nd Award), and a Army Meritorious Unit Commendation (AMUA).  He completed 4 years, 7 months, and 27 days of active duty service.  At the time his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Stewart, GA.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 3 May 2011, the commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, by reason misconduct-Commission of a Serious Offense, specifically for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) on 6 November 2009 and 27 December 2010.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 4 May 2011, 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 31 May 2011, 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 separated on 22 June 2011, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKQ, and an RE code of 3.

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

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

The applicant’s record shows he received two counseling statements, dated 26 January 2011 and 1 February 2011, for receiving two DUI citations in South Carolina.  The applicant’s record did not contain any other derogatory information.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States), a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), Court documents from the State of South Carolina, dated 23 and 25 May 2011, and a letter from his attorney dated 6 June 2011.




POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided with the application.

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 record of service, his military records, the documents 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's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s service was marred by the reported incidents of him being arrested and charged twice for DUI and two negative counseling statements.

3.  The applicant contends, in effect, he was discharged even though the charges for the two DUI offenses were dismissed by the court.  He states that he deployed in between the two offenses and used alcohol as a crutch during that time.  The applicant states he was later diagnosed with PTSD by the VA, is receiving treatment for his condition and no longer abuses alcohol.

4.  There is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that his discharge was not proper and/or equitable.  In fact, the applicant’s record shows he received two traffic citations for DUI on 6 November 2009 and 27 December 2010 and two negative counseling statements regarding the DUI incidents.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. 

5.  The applicant contends the VA has diagnosed him with PTSD.  However, a careful review of the entire record reveals that on 2 March 2011, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  Further, there are many Soldiers with the same condition that completed their service successfully.
 
6.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.

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:  25 September 2013      Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: None

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:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
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)		AR20130006032



Page 2 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1