IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 17 April 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140005520 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the Board determined the reason for discharge to be 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 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 attend college and further his education using his GI Bill benefits. He believes his performance throughout his military career was honorable. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 26 March 2014 b. Discharge received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 19 June 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, Chapter 9, AR 635-200 JPD, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: HSB, 2nd Bn, 2nd FA, Fort Sill, OK f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 13 October 2009, 4 years and 21 weeks g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 8 months, 7 days h. Total Service: 3 years, 8 months, 7 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-4 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 13B10, Cannon Crewmember m. GT Score: 104 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Afghanistan (110225-120216) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, MUC, ACM-w/2CS, NDSM, GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR-2, NATO MDL, 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 13 October 2009, for a period of 4 years and 21 weeks. He was 19 years old at the time of enlistment and a high school graduate. His record indicates he served a period of combat in Afghanistan; achieved the rank of SPC/E-4; and earned several awards to include the ARCOM and AAM. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence of record indicates on 1 May 2013, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure. 2. On 28 May 2013, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure for being involved in two serious incidents of alcohol-related misconducts within 12 months. The commander, in consultation with the rehabilitation team, determined that further rehabilitative efforts were not practicable, rendering the rehabilitation a failure. 3. The unit commander advised the applicant of his rights and recommended discharge from the Army with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and waiver of any further rehabilitation measures. 4. On 31 May 2013, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his own behalf. 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 6 June 2013, 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 discharged from the Army on 19 June 2013, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, for being an alcohol rehabilitation failure, with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JPD and a RE code of 4. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. A Company Grade Letter of Reprimand dated 24 August 2012, for his unprofessional conduct on 16 August 2012. 2. Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment form, dated 29 August 2012, which indicates the applicant was referred for rehabilitation. 3. Lawton Police Department Offense Report, dated 24 March 2013, which indicates the applicant was a subject of investigation for assault and disturbing the peace. 4. Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment form, dated 25 May 2013, which indicates the applicant was referred as a result of disturbing the peace and two counts of assault and battery. 5. Several counseling statements dated between 17 August 2012 and 10 April 2013, for being apprehended by the Lawton Police and jailed for fighting, failing to report, and disturbing the peace. 6. DA Form 4126-R (Bar to Reenlistment Certificate), which was approved on 28 September 2012. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293 and two letters of recommendation. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None was provided with the application. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 9 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 issues and documents submitted with the application, there were 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 fact 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 expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of being able to attend college and further his education using his GI Bill benefits. 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. 5. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. BOARD DETERMINATION AND DIRECTED ACTION: After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and notwithstanding the analyst’s Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the length and quality of the applicant’s service, to include his combat service. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. However, the Board determined the reason for discharge to be proper and equitable and voted not to change it. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 17 April February 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA 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) AR20140005520 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1