IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 11 February 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140004190 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 discharge to honorable and a change to the narrative reason for discharge. 2. The applicant states, in effect, after a long night of drinking, he missed his report time for the graduation course critique. He states, he reported to the school and his instructor smelled alcohol on his breath. He believes his discharge was unjust because he blew a .02, , even though he was not over the Army’s legal limit of .05 for being drunk on duty, wasn’t allowed to graduate, and received an unjust separation code. He contends, he has a medical condition called hypothyroidism. He states, he completed the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) with no issues as required by his chain of command. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 5 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 16 January 2014 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Unacceptable Conduct, AR 600-8-24, Paragraph 4-2b and 4-24a(1), BNC, NA e. Unit of assignment: HHC, 25th Combat Aviation Brigade, Wheeler Army Airfield, HI f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 5 February 2010/Indefinite g. Current Enlistment Service: 3 years, 11 months, 12 days h. Total Service: 12 years, 5 months, 13 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: DEP, 990220-990526, NA RA, 990527-011217, HD Break, 011218-040602, NA RA, 040603-070625, HD USAR, 070626-100204, NA (Concurrent Service) k. Highest Grade Achieved: CW2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 140A0, Command/Control Systems m. GT Score: NA n. Education: Masters Degree o. Overseas Service: SWA, Korea, Germany p. Combat Service: Afghanistan, (120121-120120), Kuwait (NIF- 061017) q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-6, AAM, MUC, ACM-2CS, AGCM, NDSM, AFEM, GWOTEM, OSB-2, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-3, NATO MDL r. Administrative Separation Board: NIF s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 May 1999, for a period of 6 years. After a break in service, he reenlisted on 3 June 2004, for a period of 6 years. He was 26 years old at the time of reentry and had a college degree. On 26 June 2007, he was commissioned as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army and ordered to active duty for an indefinite period of time. On 5 February 2010, he was reappointed in the Regular Army. He served in Germany, Afghanistan and Korea. He earned six ARCOMs and an AAM. He completed a total of 12 years, 5 months, and 13 days of creditable military service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving in Hawaii. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence of record shows that on 12 June 2013, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraphs 4-2(b), 4-2(b)(7), 4-2(b)(8), 4-2(b)(14), and 4-2(c)(5), by reason of acts of personal misconduct, neglect or failure to perform duties, conduct unbecoming of an officer, failure of a service school course, and derogatory information. Specifically for: a. reporting late to class at least five times while attending the Joint Interface Control Officers Course (130308-130315), b. reporting to class while under the influence of alcohol. A subsequent breathalyzer revealed he had blood alcohol content of .028 percent and .029 percent (130315), c. lying to a superior officer by stating he was late for class because he was involved in a traffic accident (130318). d. knowingly neglecting his duty to bring a computer disc to the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) as directed, instead he brought his personal laptop in violation of security policies (130310), e. removal from the Joint Interface Control Officers Course for misconduct (130315), f. receiving a GOMOR for misconduct (130510), and g. conduct unbecoming an officer. 2. The applicant was directed to show cause for retention in the Army. He was advised that he could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination or submit a rebuttal and request an appearance before a Board of Inquiry. 3. On 31 October 2013, the applicant submitted his request for discharge in lieu of elimination proceedings. He voluntarily waived consideration of his case by a Board of Inquiry contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less than honorable or general, under honorable conditions. 4. The DA Ad Hoc Review Board reviewed the applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of elimination and recommended the elimination action be accepted with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 5. On 30 December 2013, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 6. On 2 January 2014, the Commander, Army Human Resources Command, Fort Knox, Kentucky, issued a message regarding the applicant’s discharge. The applicant was to be discharged with a characterization of service as general, under honorable conditions and a SPD code of BNC. 7. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 16 January 2014, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 8. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Four OERs covering the period 8 July 2009 through 4 January 2014. The applicant received three ratings of “Outstanding Performance/Must Promote” and one “Satisfactory Performance” from his raters. On two reports he was rated as “Best Qualified/No Box Check” and the remaining reports he received a rating of “Best Qualified/Center of Mass” and “Fully Qualified/Center of Mass” from his senior raters. 2. A GOMOR, dated 10 May 2013, for inappropriate conduct while attending the Joint Interface Control Officers Course, Nellis AFB, NV, for being late to class on multiple occasions, making a false official statement, violating security policies, and reporting to class under the influence of alcohol. 3. A Security Forces Blotter Report, dated 15 March 2013, reflects the applicant was the subject of an investigation for drunkenness. 4. Three negative counseling statements, dated 8 March 2013, 10 March 2013 and 15 March 2013, for making a false statement and failing to obey an order or regulation. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided an online application, dated 25 February 2014 and a DD Form 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any in support of his application. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-24, Officer Transfers and Discharges, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of commissioned and warrant officers. Chapter 4 outlines the policy and procedure for the elimination of officers from the active Army for substandard performance of duty, misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, and in the interest of national security. 2. AR 600-8-24, paragraph 1-22a, provides that an officer will normally receive an honorable characterization of service when the quality of the officer’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty. An honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. 3. A general under honorable conditions characterization of service will normally be issued to an officer when the officer’s military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A separation under honorable conditions will normally be appropriate when an officer submits an unqualified resignation or a request for relief from active duty under circumstances involving misconduct which renders the officer unsuitable for further service, unless an under other than honorable conditions separation is appropriate. 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 "BNC" as the appropriate code to assign officers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Paragraph 4-2b and 4-24a(1), for unacceptable conduct. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge and a change to the narrative reason was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 2. 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 Army officers. It brought discredit on the Army and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. By his misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge. 3. The applicant provided no corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the unacceptable conduct or poor duty performance. Further, the applicant’s record contains no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. It appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 4. The applicant contends his discharge was unjust because he was under the Army’s legal limit for being drunk on duty, as documented in the GOMOR. However, the applicant’s service was not consistent with the Army standards for acceptable conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. The applicant diminished his service by receiving a GOMOR for being late to class on multiple occasions, making a false official statement, violating security policies, and reporting to class under the influence of alcohol. 5. The applicant contends he received an unjust separation code. However, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of elimination because of his misconduct and moral or professional dereliction, and derogatory information. 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 "BNC" as the appropriate code to assign officers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Paragraph 4-2b and 4-24a(1), for unacceptable conduct. 6. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be 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. 7. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. Therefore, the reason for discharge and 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: 11 February 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) AR20140004190 Page 6 of 7 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1