1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 12 May 2016 b. Date Received: 17 May 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, he was only in trouble one time while in the Army. He received a driving under the influence and had it dismissed in court. His unit had a policy of "one and done." He desires the upgrade because it would allow him to receive full GI Bill benefits. The benefits would allow him to finish school in order to provide the best life for his daughter. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 14 July 2017, 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 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 April 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 February 2016 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, with a BAC of 0.150. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 25 February 2016, the applicant waived his rights to consult with A JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 2 March 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 July 2015 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 22 / Some College / 114 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B10, Infantryman / 3 years, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 1 April 2013 - 31 May 2015 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Kuwait (17 February 2015 - 7 November 2015) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Colorado Springs Police Department, Case Report, dated 6 December 2015, reflects the applicant was placed in custody after he hit a parked car and drove off. Later, a blood alcohol test revealed he had a blood alcohol content of .150. General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 4 March 2016, reflects the applicant was placed in custody after he hit a parked car and drove off. A blood alcohol test revealed he had a blood alcohol content of .150. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 1 January 2016, reflects the applicant was cleared for any 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 and DD Form 149. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 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 have been 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 an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. 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. 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. 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 14 July 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 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change 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 AR20160009741 1