IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 4 March 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140005397 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, the discharge was improper because it was the only UCMJ action he received while serving in the Army. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 24 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 9 April 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 2d Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 12 March 2012 / 3 years, 18 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 28 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 28 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 19D10, Cavalry Scout m. GT Score: 114 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR r. Administrative Separation Board: N/A s. Performance Ratings: N/A t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 March 2012, for a period of 3 years and 18 weeks. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He completed 1 year and 28 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Hood, Texas. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence contained in the applicant’s service record indicates that on 21 February 2013, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, by reason of misconduct (serious offense); specifically for failing to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully consuming alcohol while being under 21 years of age (130105) and for driving while intoxicated (130105). 2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 3. On 22 February 2013, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and elected not to 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 19 March 2013, 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 9 April 2013, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c, 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. An Article 15, dated 28 February 2013, for wrongfully consuming alcohol while being under 21 years of age (130105). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $758.00 pay per month for two months (suspended), 45 days of extra duty and restriction (FG). 2. Two counseling statements, dated 7 December 2012 and 28 January 2013, for failing to obey orders or regulations, opportunity leave, and safety awareness. 3. A Hampton Police Department Incident Report, dated 5 January 2013, that indicates the applicant was charged with the following offenses: DUI, fleeing, and purchase and possession of intoxicating liquor by a minor. The report also contains the arresting officer’s statement. 4. Discharge Order Number 087-0139, dated 28 March 2013, Headquarters III Corps and Fort Hood, Texas 76544, reflects applicant was discharged from the Regular Army with an effective date of 9 April 2013. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 14 March 2014, a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review 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 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 a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 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 the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career. Although a single 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 a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 5. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 6. 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: 4 March 2015 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) AR20140005397 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1