IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	2 April 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130009816
___________________________________________________________________________

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 better his life.  The applicant contends he participated in two combat deployments and received several awards.  He had a difficult time adjusting from combat and did not make the right choices upon his return.  He has done a great deal to turn his life around since his discharge.  He has been sober for over one year and recently completed an intensive 12 month inpatient treatment program to deal with his alcohol abuse once and for all.  He is committed to his recovery and never drinking again.  He has become a better man and a proud member of society.  He continues to be pro-active in all aspects of his treatment and life and is looking forward to enrolling in school to become a registered nurse.  He has been an active volunteer in the San Pedro and Long Beach, California areas, in an attempt to give back to those that are less fortunate in the communities.  Now he looks forward to being a better father and husband to his family.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		20 May 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			17 January 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, 							Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			A Trp, 1st Sqd, 4th Cav Rgt, 4th IN BCT, Fort Riley, 						KS
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	21 July 2005, 5 years and 19 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	6 years, 5 months, 27 days
h. Total Service:			6 years, 5 months, 27 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	19D10, Cavalry Scout
m. GT Score:				121
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:			Iraq (070207-080411 and 090827-100706)
q. Decorations/Awards:		ARCOM-2, AGCM-2, ICM-w/2CS, NDSM, 							GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR-2, CAB
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		Yes
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 July 2005, for a period of 5 years and 19 weeks.  He was 30 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  His record indicates he served two periods of combat in Iraq; earned several awards including two ARCOMs, two AGCMs, and the CAB, and achieved the rank of SGT/E-5.  He completed         6 years, 5 months, and 27 days of military service.  It appears the applicant was held past his original ETS as a result of his deployments to Iraq (i.e., convenience of the government/stop loss).

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 10 November 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct (serious offense) for being drunk on duty on diverse occasions.  

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an UOTHC discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 16 November 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than general, under honorable conditions 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 commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 15 December 2011, the separation authority approved the conditional waiver request, 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 17 January 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), 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.  Article 15, imposed on 1 November 2011, for being found drunk on duty (110913 and 110914).  Punisment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-4, forfeiture of $1162.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), extra duty and restruction for 45 days, (FG).
2.  Three NCOERs covering the period of 1 May 2008 to 30 June 2011.  The applicant was rated overall as "Fully Capable," on all reports.

3.  Fort Riley Police Department reports dated, 13 September 2011 and 14 September 2011.

4.  Three negative counseling statements dated between 13 September 2011 and                  16 September 2011, for being drunk on duty.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a copy of his VA Long Beach medical records, Beacon House recovery letter, VA LCSW letter, combat veterans court letter, VA Long Beach Substance Abuse Treatment Program letter, community service letter, Beacon House Certificate of Graduation, and a copy of his DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant contends that since his discharge he has been sober for over one year and recently completed an intensive 12 month inpatient treatment program to deal with his alcohol abuse.

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 record of service was marred by an Article 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and several negative counseling statements.

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 contends that he had good service which included two combat deployments and two AGCMs.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceedings 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 incidents of misconduct or by the multiple negative counseling statements and the documented actions under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

5.  The applicant contends that since leaving the Army, he has been sober for over one year and recently completed an intensive 12 month inpatient treatment program to deal with his alcohol abuse.  His post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with the application; and the applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  

6.  The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge.  However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service.  Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings.  The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

7.  The applicant expressed his intentions of enrolling in school to become a registered nurse.  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.

8.  The record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record.  

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

10.  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 April 2014        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)		AR20130009816



Page 5 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1