1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 16 November 2015 b. Date Received: 22 December 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, his discharge was based on his arrest following a motor vehicle accident. While it initially appeared as serious civilian charges, the final legal process after his discharge determined it as a first-offense misdemeanor (it was the only criminal conviction on his record). Additionally, his current service characterization does not take into consideration his entire record of service. He had an exemplary service record as outlined in his supporting documents. After his arrest, the applicant continued to give his utmost effort in several positions to the Soldiers and mission of his battalion for nearly nine additional months until his discharge. He also worked to rehabilitate himself following the accident as documented by a certificate of completing substance abuse training and a mental evaluation showing he had no alcohol abuse issues. The nature of his service are represented both in the last Officer Evaluation and in a letter of recommendation from my battalion commander, including his personal statement, several character statements, and his current resume showing his career progression, both before and after his active service. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 March 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: Unacceptable Conduct / AR 600-8-24, Paragraph 4-2b / JNC / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 1 June 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 18 November 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed to show cause for retention on active duty under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraphs 4-2b(5), 4-2b(8), and 4-2c(5), for misconduct, moral, or professional dereliction, and conduct unbecoming of an officer due to the following reasons: On 10 August 2014, he wrongfully operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol; due to his impairment, he veered into oncoming traffic on a major interstate and caused multiple vehicle collision which resulted in physical injuries to the occupants of the other vehicles. On 24 October 2014, he received an administrative reprimand for the aforementioned acts of misconduct which was subsequently filed in his OMPF pursuant to AR 600-37. (3) Recommended Characterization: Unit Commander recommended retention on Active Duty; Battalion Commander recommended six-month deferment; and Brigade Commander recommended an honorable characterization of service (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 16 December 2014, the applicant elected not to submit a resignation or request discharge in lieu of elimination, instead he submitted a rebuttal statement and requested to be retained on active duty. (5) GCMCA Recommendation Date / Characterization: 2 March 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (6) DA Ad Hoc Review Board: 7 April 2015, General (Under Honorable Conditions) (7) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 May 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 21 May 2011 / 5-years ADSO, USMA Appointment b. Age at Appointment / Education / GT Score: 22 / BS Degree (Political Science) / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-2 / 11A, 5S, 2B Infantry / 4 years, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (26 September 2012 to 27 March 2013) f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, NDSM, ACM-CS, GWOTSM, ASR, NATOMDL g. Performance Ratings: Four OERS as follows: 20 July 2012 thru 30 September 2013, Outstanding Performance, Must Promote 1 October 2013 thru 27 March 2014, Outstanding Performance, Must Promote 28 March 2014 thru 19 September 2014, RFC, Capable 20 September 2014 thru 1 June 2015, Proficient h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 24 October 2014, for driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs on 10 August 2014, in violation of Article 111, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 4 December 2014, provides no diagnoses and the applicant was cleared for any administrative action deemed necessary by his command. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; ORB; self-authored statement; Unit and Battalion Commanders supporting statements, dated 3 November 2014 and 12 April 2015, respectively; three character reference statements, dated in November 2014; three OERS with ending period, 30 September 2013, 27 March 2014, and 1 June 2015; DD Form 214; ASAP Certificate; ARCOM; Report of Mental Status Evaluation; and Resume. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant is currently employed as a marketing analyst for an LLC (Limited Liability Company). 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 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. A discharge of honorable, general, or under other than honorable conditions characterization of service may be granted. 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 "JNC" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraphs 4-2b and 4-24a(1), Unacceptable Conduct. 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, and 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 Army officers. It brought discredit on the Army and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant diminished the quality of his service which led to the reason for his discharge. The applicant provided no corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or sufficient evidence that his service mitigated the unacceptable conduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. Further, the applicant's record contains no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant's contentions about his discharge being unjust because after his separation, the final adjudication of the charges, which led to his discharge, was a first-offense misdemeanor (the only criminal conviction on his record) and the totality of his entire service record was not taken into consideration, were carefully considered. However, there is also a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further sufficient evidence has been provided with the request to change the characterization of his discharge. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant's performance and character. However, the persons providing the supporting and character reference statements were not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incident of misconduct and his post-service accomplishments, the Board can find that his complete period of service and accomplishments were or were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant the relief he is requesting. Further, the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization 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 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 3 March 2017, 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 SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. 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 AR20150019169 1