IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 1 May 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140005379 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 discharge characterization from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was the result of being treated unfairly, impartial, and different from others in his unit. He contends he served for six years without receiving a disciplinary action except for a GOMOR. He contends he served two periods of combat, earned several awards to include two ARCOMs, four AAMs, and the AGCM, and has attended several military schools. He contends he is being diagnosed with PTSD and currently receiving benefits and medication. He believes having served his country with honor and dignity his discharge should be upgraded. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 21 March 2014 b. Discharge received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 21 September 2013 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 2nd Bn, 35th IN, Schofield Barracks, HI f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 10 April 2009, 3 years (Documents extending the applicant's enlistment past 9 April 2012 were not found in the available record) g. Current Enlistment Service: 4 years, 5 months, 12 days h. Total Service: 6 years, 29 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: RA-070823-090409/HD k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-5 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 56M20, Chaplain Assistant m. GT Score: 89 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: Hawaii, Southwest Asia p. Combat Service: Iraq (080827-090823) and Afghanistan (110617- 120331) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-2, AAM-4, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, ACM-w/2CS, ICM-w/CS, GWOTSM, NPDR, ASR, OSR, NATO MDL, CAB r. Administrative Separation Board: No s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: None u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 August 2007, for a unknown period of service. On 10 April 2009, he reenlisted for period of 3 years. He was 21 years old at the time of reenlistment and a high school graduate. His record indicates he served in Afghanistan and Iraq; earned several awards to include two ARCOMs, four AAMs, the AGCM, and the CAB; and achieved the rank of SGT/E-5. He was serving at Schofield Barracks, HI when separation action was initiated. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s available record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. 2. The DD Form 214 indicates on 21 August 2013, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Further, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKQ and a reentry eligibility (RE) code of 3. 3. The applicant’s available record shows no actions under the UCMJ. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. A Military Police Report dated 4 April 2012, which shows the applicant was the subject of investigation for operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant. 2. A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 17 May 2012, which shows the applicant was reprimanded for operating a motor vehicle (120331) while under the influence of alcohol, with blood alcohol content (BAC) of .115%. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293. 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 available military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. The applicant’s available record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. However, the record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 3. The applicant contends his discharge was the result of not being treated fairly and not the same as others. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unfairly treated. The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the government’s presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. 4. The applicant contends he had good service which included two combat tours, receiving of several awards to include two ARCOMs, four AAMs, AGCM, and the CAB. 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. However, a determination on whether his contentions have merit cannot be made because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the discharge packet is not available in the official record. 5. The applicant also contends he is being diagnosed with PTSD and is currently receiving benefits and medication. However, the available service record contains no evidence of PTSD diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. 6. The applicant expressed that he is only receiving 60 percent of his educational 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. 7. Therefore, based on what is available in the applicant’s record and applying the presumption of government regularity, it appears that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, thus the analyst recommends the Board deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 1 May 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 2 No Change: 3 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) AR20140005379 Page 2 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1