IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 22 April 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140008353 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 characterization to honorable. In addition, the applicant requests a change to the narrative reason for separation. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he realizes the mistake he made 10 years ago and would like to stop living under the shadow of his discharge. The applicant contends, an upgrade of his discharge will increase his chance of getting a new job. The applicant further contends, he was offered the discharge, after CID saw him at a bar while he was enrolled in ASAP, so he took it. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 5 May 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 8 December 2004 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, AR 635-200 Chapter 9, JPD, RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: A Company, Military Police Activity, 1-210th Aviation Regiment, Fort Rucker, AL f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 13 May 2003/5 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 6 months, 26 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 6 months, 26 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 21M10, Firefighter m. GT Score: NIF n. Education: GED o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWTSM, 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 13 May 2003 for a period of 5 years. He was 20 years old at the time of entry and had a GED certificate. He completed 1 year, 6 months, and 26 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Rucker, Alabama. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. On 12 October 2004, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure for being arrested for public intoxication on 4 October 2014. 2. On 17 November 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 9, by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure based on an evaluation, conducted by the Fort Rucker ASAP, recommended the applicant be classified as a rehabilitation failure and discharged from the Army. 3. The unit commander advised the applicant of his rights and recommended a discharge from the Army with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and waiver of any rehabilitation measures. 4 On an unknown date, the applicant consulted 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. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 5. On 2 December 2004, 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 separated on 8 December 2004, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, a SPD code of JPD and a reentry code of 4. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. An Article 15, dated 13 September 2004, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (040716) and wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties (040716). The punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of E-2 (suspended), forfeiture of seven days of pay ($328.00) for one month, 14 days of extra duty and restriction, oral reprimand, and presentation on effects of intoxication on duty (CG). 2. An incomplete Article 15, dated 3 November 2004, for unlawfully carrying a concealed weapon and being drunk and disorderly (FG). 3. Three negative counseling statements, dated 21 July 2004, 10 Oct 2004, and 19 October 2004, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty, being drunk on duty, failing to rehabilitate, and chapter recommendation. 4. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 21 October 2004, reflects the applicant had a clear and normal thought process and was mentally responsible. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 1 May 2014, and a DD Form 214 covering the period of service under review. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: None 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. 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 "JPD" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure. 5. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned a SPD Code of "JPD" will be assigned a RE Code of 4. 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. The evidence of record establishes the fact the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems. 3. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 4. The applicant contends, he was offered the discharge after CID saw him at a bar, while he was enrolled in ASAP, so he took it. However, 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 his overall service record. 5. The record shows 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: 22 April 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) AR20140008353 Page 5 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1