1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 December 2017 b. Date Received: 7 December 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that the discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 36 months of service with no other adverse action. The applicant completed the term of service prior to discharge. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 April 2019, 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: 28 October 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 15 October 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for driving while under the influence of alcohol in on 22 August 2009; Failing to go to his appointed place of duty on 27 February 2009; and Failing a diagnostic APFT and two record APFT's (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 October 2009 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 29 October 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 31 August 2006 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 103 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 15P10, Aviation OPS SP / 3 years, 1 month, 28 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Kansas Standard Arrest Report and Criminal Investigation Record, dated 22 August 2009, showing the applicant was the subject of investigation for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Court documents from the District Court of Geary County, Kansas. Military Police Report, dated 24 August 2008, showing the applicant was the subject of investigation for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, driving in violation of restrictions, fleeing or attempt to elude a law enforcement officer, reckless driving, and maximum speed limits. Summarized Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 26 March 2009, for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Physical Training formation on 27 February 2009. The punishment consisted of extra duty for 7 days, restriction for 7 days, and oral reprimand. Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard, dated 30 October 2008, 9 April 2009, and 25 September 2009. Several Negative counseling statements for various acts of misconduct and duty performance. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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 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 seeks relief contending that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 36 months of service with no other adverse action. He contends he completed his term of service prior to discharge. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, the service record indicates the applicant committed several discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 26 April 2019, 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 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 AR20180000566 1