1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 31 January 2016 b. Date Received: 22 February 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, in 2014 he was arrested for DUI, which he fought the charges for 10 months. At the same time, he was also fighting the Army's decision to discharge him. After his discharge, he was unable to continue his court because he no longer had the backing of the military. During his period of service, he served in several positions that were usually held by a sergeant. He deployed to Afghanistan for nine months and was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Army Commendation Medal and other awards. Additionally, he conducted a month long training mission at West Point Academy to assist in the training of cadets. He was awarded an Army Achievement Medal for his efforts. The DUI charge has been the only black mark on his record and overshadowed anything that he had done before the incident. Even after he received the notice that he may be discharged, he continued to conduct himself to the best of his ability by assisting in the training of new Soldiers to his platoon. After his discharge, he returned to Michigan and has worked there ever since. It is his desire to return to service as soon as possible. The Army is the highlight of his life and his greatest achievement. He recognizes that he failed his comrades' and the country's trust and he regrets it every day. He humbly requests the Board review his service and look at it as a whole, and not just one mistake. He is trying, and will continue to try and make amends for his mistake. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 June 2017, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and his prior period of honorable service, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 July 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 5 May 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 14 December 2014, he physically controlled a passenger car while drunk. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 May 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 28 May 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 October 2014 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 112 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 2 years, 10 months, 24 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 20 August 2012 - 30 October 2014 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (10 March - 20 November 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-2CS, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, NATOMDL, CIB g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Georgia, Uniform Traffic Citation, Summons and Accusation, dated 14 December 2014, reflects the applicant was cited for speeding in excess of maximum speed limit (71 MPH in a 55 MPH zone). An allied document, reflects that the applicant was administered a chemical test, which resulted in an alcohol concentration of 0.08 grams or more. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 13 March 2015, reflects the applicant was reprimanded for speeding and for driving under the influence with a blood alcohol content of .158 grams. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 3 December 2015, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Gained employment. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): 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. Paragraph 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. 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. 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, such that he should be retained on active duty. The applicant contends the event that caused his discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. 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. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service. However, 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 3. There are no basis upon which to grant a change to the reason or to the RE code. An RE Code of 3 indicates the applicant requires a waiver prior to being allowed to reenlist. If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine eligibility to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance. They all recognize his good performance while in the Army; however, the persons providing the character reference statements did not provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 June 2017, and by a 3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, to include his combat service, and his prior period of honorable service, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change f. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160004603 4