1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 20 July 2016 b. Date Received: 25 July 2016 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant, through counsel, requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, a narrative reason change and an RE code change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the Chief of Military Justice, in his legal review dated 13 April 2015, incorrectly stated that the applicant had been accused of driving while intoxicated, and also incorrectly stated that the evidence supported that the applicant had been driving under the influence of alcohol. The incorrect statements in the legal review likely caused the applicant to get discharged with a general (under honorable conditions), character of service rather than retained in the Army Mentorship Program or discharged with an honorable characterization of service. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 2 October 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. introduction of false allegation of DWI), 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 narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Conduct Deficiency / AR 210-26, Chapter 6-17 and 7-3; and, AR 612-205, Table 3, Rule 6, Note 3 / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 21 October 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 April 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: On 20 February 2015, the applicant was notified of his referral to conduct investigation hearing. On 9 March 2015, a conduct investigation hearing found that the applicant had two field grade Article 10 actions that were properly constituted, reviewed and approved and the investigating officer affirmed the awards. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 21 October 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 2 July 2012 / NIF (USMA CDT) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / 3 years, USMA / 124 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: Cadet / 13B10, Cannon Crewmember / 4 years, 24 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 27 September 2011 - 1 June 2012 / HD IADT, 31 October 2011 - 18 March 2012 / HD USAR, 1 June 2012 - 1 July 2012 / NIF e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Conduct investigation as described in previous paragraph 3c. Preliminary Inquiry for violation of Cadet Disciplinary Code, dated 19 December 2013, reflects that the applicant violated USCC SOP, Chapter 4, Articles 1, 2, and 3 by missing movement to the Army/Navy Game 2013. Early on the morning of 14 December 2013, the applicant failed to get on the "boomerang" bus, as instructed by his Tactical Teem, as a result of his adverse standing from a recent BDE alcohol board. He was told multiple times by others to make the bus, all warnings that he ignored. 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: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation AR 210-26, paragraph 6-17 and AR 612-205, set forth the basic authority for appointment and separation of Service Academy Attendees. Chapter 7 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for reasons other than physical disability. A member separated under this chapter will be processed under provisions of Table 3. AR 612-205, Table 3, Rule 6 and AR 210-26, paragraph 6-17 and 7-3, identifies cadets who are discharged under the provisions of these Regulations, as Conduct Deficiency. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant, through counsel, requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, a narrative reason change and an RE code change. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The military record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with USMA standards for service academy attendees and performance of duty by a cadet. It brought discredit on the academy, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicant requested a change to the narrative reason for the discharge. However, AR 210-26, paragraph 6-17 and AR 612-205, Table 3, Rule 6 identifies the reason for separation of cadets who are discharged under the provisions of these regulations, as conduct deficiency. The applicant submitted several issues of equity and propriety regarding his discharge from the US Military Academy at West Point. However, the ADRB found no issues of impropriety or inequity in the reason for separation from the Army and characterization of service set forth on the DD Form 214. The ADRB cannot set aside the disenrollment from USMA. If the applicant desires to challenge the disenrollment from USMA, he should apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. Further, 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. 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 2 October 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. introduction of a false allegation of DWI), 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 narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 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 AR20160013406 1