IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	30 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130008390
___________________________________________________________________________

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, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to use his GI Bill benefits for education.  He contends his two DUI's were the only times he was in trouble during his military career.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		29 April 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			16 November 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200 							Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			B Co, 526th BSB (R)(P), 2d BCT(R)(P), 101st Abn 						Div (AA), Fort Campbell, KY
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	16 November 2009, 4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:	3 years, 0 months, 1 day
h. Total Service:			4 years, 2 months, 14 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		RA-080903-091115/HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	91B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic
m. GT Score:				91
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Afghanistan (100601-110417)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, ACM-w/CS, NDSM 							GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL
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 3 September 2008, for a period of 3 years and 25 weeks.  He was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  On 16 November 2009, he reenlisted for a period of 4 years.  His record indicates he served in Afghanistan; earned several awards to include an ARCOM, AAM, and the AGCM.  He achieved the rank of SPC/E-4.  He completed a total of 4 years, 2 months, and 14 days of active military service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 13 November 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by commission of a serious offense, for wrongfully driving under the influence of alcohol x 2 (100124 and 120819).

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 18 October 2002, prior to being notified by his commander, 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 16 November 2012, 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 16 November 2012, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ 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.  An MP Report indicating the applicant was incarcerated in a civilian facility, on 24 January 2010, for driving under the influence.

2.  A General Officer Administrative Reprimand, date 20 April 2010, for driving a motor vehicle on 24 January 2010, in the state of Kentucky with a blood alcohol content of .185 percent.

3.  An MP Report indicating the applicant was arrested for driving under the influence on       19 August 2012.

4.  A General Officer Administrative Reprimand, date 4 September 2012, for driving a motor vehicle on 19 August 2012, in the state of Tennessee with a blood alcohol content of .179 percent.

5.  Three negative counseling statements dated between 22 August 2012 and 9 October 2012, for driving under the influence of alcohol, revocation of his on post driving privileges, and his separation/elimination from the military.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293.

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 document and the issue 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 of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by two General Officer Administrative Reprimand's for driving a motor vehicle under the influence on 24 January 2010 and 19 August 2012.

3.  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.  

4.  The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of receiving his GI Bill benefits to further his education.  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:  30 October 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:	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)		AR20130008390



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1