IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	20 June 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130016508
___________________________________________________________________________

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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the overall length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board determined the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  




      
      
      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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to fully honorable, a change to the narrative reason for discharge, and reentry code.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident within his 41-months of military service.  He states he was arrested for driving while impaired on 5 May 2012.  He states he is remorseful and personally ashamed of his actions.  He would like the Board to note the following accomplishments:

     a.  He completed the Army’s Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) and continued to carry out his duties.  

     b.  He served with distinction for two flag officers for a 36 month period as a personal security officer and driver.

     c.  He was a member of the XVIII Airborne Corps Assault Command Post as a Airborne Radio Transmission Operator.

     d.  He was a member of the XVIII Airborne Corps ten-miler team.

     e.  He has been working in a restaurant for eight months since separation and moved up from busboy to front manager.

     f.  He continues to perform community service as a member of Sparking Innovation conducting assembly presentations on anti-bullying and positive lifestyle choices to high school age children.  
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			5 September 2013
b. Discharge Received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:				28 September 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Misconduct, Serious Offense, AR 635-200
Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:				HSC, HHB, XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort
Bragg, Fort Bragg, NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		13 May 2009/4 years
g. Current Enlistment Service:		3 years, 4 months, 17 days
h. Total Service:				3 years, 6 months, 28 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			DEP, 090303-090512, NA
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-5
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		25U2P, Signal Support Systems Specialist
m. GT Score:					110
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				SWA
p. Combat Service:				Iraq, 110112-111112
q. Decorations/Awards:			JSCM, AAM, JMUA, NDSM, GWOTSM 
ICM-CS, NOPDR, ASR, OSR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		NA
s. Performance Ratings:			Yes
t. Counseling Statements:			Yes
u. Prior Board Review:				No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 May 2009, for a period of 4 years.  He was 21 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  He served in Iraq and earned a JSCM and a AAM.  He completed 3 years, 6 months, and 28 days of active duty service.  When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Bragg, NC.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 26 June 2012, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense).  Specifically for being arrested driving while impaired after his vehicle was stopped for speeding.  His blood alcohol content was determined to be .12% after an intoximeter test.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended an honorable discharge.

3.  The record is void of the applicant’s elections of rights form indicating he consulted with legal counsel.  He was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and elected to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The record is void of a rebuttal statement from the applicant.  The unit commander subsequently recommended the applicant be retained in the Army.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended the applicant be retained in the military.  

4.  On 23 July 2012, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 28 September 2012, 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:

1.  A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 19 June 2012, for driving while impaired after he was stopped for speeding.  An intoximeter administered determined his blood alcohol content was .12%.

2.  A DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), reflects the applicant successfully completed WLC by achieving the course standards.

3.  One NCOER covering the period of 1 July 2011 to 7 January 2012.  The applicant was rated as “Among the Best” by his rater and received “1/1” for “Overall Performance/Overall Potential” from the senior rate.

4.  A counseling statement, dated 7 May 2012, for DUI.  The applicant was recommended to attend Driver Improvement Training, the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), and had his on-post driving privileges revoked for 12 months.  He was ordered to complete the necessary steps and procedures consistent with an administrative separation.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 8 August 2013, with all list enclosures, as well as the following:

     a.  A self-authored statement, dated 7 August 2013.

     b.  A DD Form 214

     c.  A DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 18 May 2012, reflecting the applicant had no obvious impairments, could appreciate the difference between right and wrong, and had a negative screening for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI).

     d.  An Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), dated 8 June 2012, reflecting the applicant deployed to Iraq for a 10-month combat deployment.

     e.  A letter from the Behavioral Counseling & Psychological Svc, PA, dated 11 May 2012, reflects the applicant was administered a substance abuse subtle screening inventory which indicated the applicant voluntarily submitted to a substance abuse assessment, the assessment showed no signs of a substance abuse handicap, and a recommendation for 16-hours of treatment to be done in a one week time period.   

     f.  A memorandum of record from BG J, dated 14 May 2012, stated in effect, he was the applicant’s supervisor.  He stated the applicant had been his driver for three months as of the date of the memorandum.  He states the applicant was a very professional and dedicated NCO.  He contends the applicant made a mistake of driving while under the influence which was out of character for him.  He was an extremely fit and motivated Soldier who desired to remain in the military and continue serving.

     g.  A letter of support from CSM J, dated 27 September 2012, stated in effect, the applicant was a stellar performer who made a terrible mistake.  He supported the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his characterization of service to honorable.  

     h.  A letter of support from SGM W, dated 3 July 2012, stated in effect, the applicant was his NCOIC while deployed to Iraq.  He stated the applicant was a well groomed NCO who was a hard worker, professional, and dedicated.  He fully supported the applicant’s desire to remain in the military.

     i.  The applicant submitted six additional letters of support, stating in effect, he made a very poor decision to drive under the influence.  However, the applicant was a professional, who was timely, motivated, full of initiative, and a positive NCO.  They contended the applicant performed all his duties in an exceptional manner and possessed great knowledge of signal communications equipment and a great amount of intestinal fortitude.

     j.  A letter from Ms. S, Community Relations Coordinator, The Salvation Army, dated 22 March 2013, indicating the applicant had completed 24 hours of community service.

     k.  The applicant submitted a copy of his medical records.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states since his discharge he has worked for a restaurant where he worked his way up from busboy to front of the house manager, continues to engage in community service as a member of Sparking Innovation conducting assembly presentations on anti-bullying and positive lifestyle choices to high school age children.  

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.

4.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  It identifies the SPD code of "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense).

5.  The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge, a change to the narrative reason for discharge and reentry code was carefully considered.  

2.  After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issue submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to fully honorable for the following reasons:  

     a. Length and quality of service:  The applicant served 3 years, 6 months, and 28 days of a 4-year enlistment, thus the preponderance of his service was honorable.

     b. The record confirms the applicant received several awards, specifically a JSCM and an AAM.

     c. The applicant served a 10-month combat deployment to Iraq in support of the global war on terrorism.

     d.  The applicant had no other derogatory information in his AMHRR.

3.  This recommendation is made after full consideration of all of the applicant’s faithful and honorable service, as well as the record of misconduct.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service may now be too harsh and as a result inequitable. 

4. The applicant contends his discharge was based on a single isolated incident and he has no other adverse actions imposed against him.  Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.    

5.  In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  However, the reason for the discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review      Date:  20 June 2014        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  No

Board Vote:
Character Change:  3	No Change:  2
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		Yes
Change Characterization to:	Honorable
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)		AR20130016508



Page 7 of 7 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1