IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	8 June 2015

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20150002650
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing her testimony, 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 her discharge characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable, a change to her narrative reason for discharge, and reentry eligibility (RE) code.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that her discharge was based on an isolated incident.  She contends her characterization of service is too harsh based on her length and quality of service.  Her discharge was inequitable because no consideration was made for her faithful service, character and potential, and that she had been in the military for a short amount of time and it was her first offense.  She also believes no consideration was made for her pass performance (i.e., recognized as a high performer by her chain of command).  She believes the decision to discharge her was influenced by the nine incidents of DUI within her command at the time of her discharge.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		11 February 2015
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			24 November 2014
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200							Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			C Co, 725th CS, JB Elmendorf-Richardson, AK
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	4 September 2012, 3 years and 26 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 2 months, 21 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 2 months, 21 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	92Y1P, Unit Supply Specialist
m. GT Score:				89
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			Alaska 
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM, NDSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		None
u. Prior Board Review:			No


SUMMARY OF SERVICE:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 September 2012, for a period of 3 years and    26 weeks.  She was 19 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate.  Her record indicates she achieved the rank of SPC/E-4 and earned several awards to include the AAM.  She was serving at JB Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, when separation action was initiated.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 22 September 2014, 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 driving a vehicle while intoxicated.

2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of her rights.

3.  On 29 September 2014, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement on her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation; however, the unit commander, recommended the separation be suspended for a period of 12 months.

4.  On 6 October 2014, 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 24 November 2014, 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 a 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:

Article 15, imposed on 30 July 2014, for driving while drunk on 22 June 2014.  The punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of E-2 and extra duty for 45 days (FG).

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and a index of exhibits A-Q which included a self-authored letter, several character letters, a copy of her Article 15 document, unit commander's recommendation memorandum, enlisted record brief, certificate for award of the AAM, college transcript, proof of current college enrollment, post DUI roll up, unit policy on prevention of alcohol and drug abuse (CG Policy #0-12), and a copy of her DD Form 214 for the period of service under review.
POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states, in effect, that she is in college pursuing an associated degree in business management.

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, misconduct (serious offense).

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

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge, a change to her narrative reason for discharge, and a change to her RE code was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, 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 her 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 her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s record of service was marred by an Article 15 for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by driving while intoxicated.

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 her discharge was based on an isolated incident.  Although an isolated incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by an isolated incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of her service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  

5.  The applicant also contends she had good service as noted by her recognition as a high performer by her chain of command and that no consideration was made for her faithful service, character and potential, and that she had been in the military for a short amount of time.  However, by regulation, a UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a member separated by reason of misconduct.  It appears the applicant’s generally good record of service was the basis for her receiving a general, under honorable conditions discharge instead of the normal under other than honorable conditions discharge.  However, her misconduct clearly diminished her overall record of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.

6.  Furthermore, 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 her overall service record.

7.  Therefore, the narrative reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. 



SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Personal Appearance	  Date:  8 June 2015     Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?   Yes

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers:  Yes 

DOCUMENTS/TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE:

The applicant submitted the following no additional documents contentions.

Board Vote:
Character Change:  1	No Change:  4
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)		AR20150002650



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1