IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	21 February 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130010919
___________________________________________________________________________

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 did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade.  However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was having family problems at the time he was charged with driving under the influence (DUI).  He is homeless with a child on the way that he wants to be able to support.  The evidence that he provided was not taken into consideration at the time of discharge.  He desires to serve his country again.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		7 June 2013
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			30 December 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, Chapter 9,                						AR 635-200, JPD, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:			Headquarters Support Company, 603rd Aviation 						Support Battalion, 3rd Combat Aviation Brigade, 						Hunter Army Airfield, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	15 September 2009, 3 years and 23 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	2 years, 3 months, 16 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 3 months, 16 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92G10, Food Service Operations
m. GT Score:				96
n. Education:				GED Certificate
o. Overseas Service:			Korea
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM, NIDSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		No
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No






SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 September 2009, for a period of 3 years and 23 weeks.  He was 25 years old at the time of entry with a GED Certificate.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92G10, Food Service Operations.  His record does not show that he served in combat, but he earned an AAM; and he achieved the rank of PFC/E-3.  He served a tour in Korea and was serving at Hunter Army Airfield, GA when his discharge was initiated.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 18 November 2011, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure.  

2.  On 7 December 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of alcohol or other drug rehabilitation failure for being seen drinking alcohol while enrolled in ASAP (111028).

3.  The unit commander advised the applicant of his rights and recommended his discharge from the Army with a service characterization of general, under honorable conditions and waiver of any rehabilitation measures.

4.  On 7 December 2011, the record indicated that the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated he intended to submit a statement on his own behalf; however, that statement is not contained in the available record.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

5.  On 22 December 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 

6.  The applicant was separated on 30 December 2011, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure, with an general, under honorable conditions discharge, a SPD code of JPD and a reentry code of 4.  

7.  The applicant’s record does not contain any documented evidence of unauthorized absences, lost time or actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).







EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Three Georgia Uniform Traffic Citations, dated 11 September 2011 for DUI/alcohol, failure to maintain a lane and an open container. 

2.  Georgia Department of Driver Services, dated 11 September 2011, indicated the applicant refused to submit to state designated chemical testing.

3.  The applicant’s record contains a negative counseling statement, dated 19 September 2011 for receiving a DUI off base.

4.  The record also contains a memorandum, dated 18 November 2011 which indicated the applicant was a rehabilitation failure.

5.  The record of evidence contains two DA Forms 2823 (Sworn Statement), dated between   11 September 2011 and 1 November 2011, which indicated he was advised to refrain from drinking alcohol and gave an account of the applicant drinking alcohol.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 149, a self-authored statement, four photos, and his Chapter 9 discharge packet consisting of 24 pages.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY:

The applicant did not provide any with his application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:
1.  Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9 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 military records, the issue and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The applicant was enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) and was 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.  As a result of the applicant’s actions and after consultation with the drug and alcohol abuse counselor, the command declared the Soldier a rehabilitation failure.  

3.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems.  The general, under honorable conditions discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.

4.  The applicant did not properly annotate the enclosed application requesting a possible discharge upgrade.  However, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant for a possible upgrade as instructed in pertinent part by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28 which stipulates that a request for review from an applicant without an honorable discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an honorable discharge unless the applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge.

5.  The applicant contends he was having family problems at the time he was charged with DUI. While the applicant may believe his family problems were the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, he has provided no evidence that he should not be held responsible for his misconduct.

6.  The applicant further contends he is homeless, has a child on the way that he wants to be able to support.  However, eligibility for housing supportive program benefits for Veterans 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.  Moreover, all veterans at risk for homelessness or attempting to exit homelessness can request immediate assistance by calling the National Call Center for Homeless Veterans hotline at 1-877-424-3838 for free and confidential assistance.

7.  Further, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.


8.  The applicant also contends the evidence that he provided was not taken into consideration at the time of his discharge.  The rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what he believes was an unfair discharge is not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature.

9.  The applicant desires to serve his country again.  Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 4.  There is basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code.  An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 

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:  21 February 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)		AR20130010919



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1