1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 13 April 2013 b. Date Received: 2 June 2015 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, he feels his discharge from military service was very unfair. Other Soldiers in his unit that were in the same situation or worse than his received no disciplinary action for their misconduct. He was discharged while others received a second chance. The misconduct was the one and only blemish in his entire five and a half years of service. The applicant contends that he should receive an upgrade since he was granted a second chance to remain in the Army. His charge of DUI was dropped and his record expunged. He has maintained steady employment since his discharge. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 5 August 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General, Under Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 7 May 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: N/A (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 16 April 2014 / General, Under Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 4 March 2011 / 3 years / 7 months extension (20 July 2011) b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 22 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: E-6 / 11B30, Infantryman / 5 years, 5 months, and 14 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: RA, 24 November 2008-3 March 2011 / HD e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: Hawaii / SWA / Iraq (12 September 2009-28 August 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM-3, AGCM, NDSM, ICM-W/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CIB, EIB, RNGR TAB g. Performance Ratings: 1 August 2011-30 July 2013, Among The Best h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: An administrative General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 24 February 2014, for driving while under the influence of alcohol. i. Lost Time: None j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, dated 13 April 2015; DD Form 214; and the following: four character statements, dated between 7 April 2015 and 20 April 2015; Army Substance Abuse Program Clinical Summary Memorandum, dated 12 March 2015; District Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii Traffic Court document, dated 18 March 2014; Ranger Course Diploma and Ranger Tab Orders; Airborne Course Diploma; NCO Academy Certificate of Graduation; DA Form 1059 for Warrior Leader Course; Award Recommendations, Certificate of Achievement; Expert Infantry Bade and Combat Infantry Badge orders; and, Congressional Liaison and Inquiry, with associated documents. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is enrolled in school and will graduate in two years with a 3.25 grade point average. He has also maintained steady employment. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 allows for separation for misconduct with paragraph 14-1 allowing for separating personnel because of minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion, or absence without leave. Paragraph 14-2 states action will be taken to separate a Soldier for misconduct when it is clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him/her as a Soldier further effort is not likely to succeed; rehabilitation is impracticable or the Soldier is not amenable to rehabilitation. 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 available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant’s record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity prevails as all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant contends that his discharge was very unfair. This contention was carefully considered; however, the merit of this contention cannot be substantiated because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are not contained in the available record. The applicant further contends, other Soldiers in his unit in the same situation or worse than his, received no disciplinary action for their misconduct and was given a second chance. The method in which another Soldier’s case was handled is not relevant to the applicant’s case. Applicable regulations state that each case must be decided on an individual basis considering the unique facts and circumstances of that particular case. The applicant also contends that he should receive an upgrade since he was not granted a second chance to remain in the Army. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines the characterization of service or the reasons for discharge, or both, were improper or inequitable. The applicant additionally contends, his DUI charge was dropped and his record expunged. The applicant submitted a District Court of the First Circuit, State of Hawaii Traffic Court document that shows that his DUI charge was dismissed without prejudice. However, this document does not sufficiently explain as to why his DUI charge was dismissed. 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 third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant’s performance. The persons providing the character reference statements were in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant’s chain of command. However, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it is his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration because they are not available in the official record. 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 5 August 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: 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 BH – Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police – PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status MST – Military Sexual Trauma RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150008805 4