ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  5 August 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170008939


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  reconsideration of his request for correction of his retired rank/grade from first lieutenant (1LT)/O-2E to captain (CPT)/O-3E.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

* DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
* Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) Packet
* AR20160002121 Decision Memorandum
* 2016 DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)

FACTS:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20160002121 on 10 May 2016.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  He has a record of satisfactory service in the grade of O3 (CPT) in accordance with Department of the Army service and Army Regulation (AR) 15-80 (AGDRB Determinations).

	b.  In accordance with AR 15-185 (ABCMR), he submits the burden of proof as part of this letter and accompanying attachments of a believed error that occurred when it was determined his service in the grade of O-3E (CPT) was not satisfactory.  As a result of the decisions of the AGDRB, he was retired in the grade of O-2E (1LT).  He believes this to be erroneous as his overall performance record as a CPT does prove a satisfactory performance for over 9 years in this rank.

	c.  He humbly requests all of his performance and achievement records be relooked and reevaluated for a more holistic view of his time in grade as an O-3E.  He believes his service and accomplishments for his fellow Soldiers, his units, and the United States Army were successful beyond his two judgmental mistakes.  He has taken full responsibility for these mistakes of his past and was justly adjudicated as a result.  His alcohol recovery and subsequent performances have been documented in overcoming these mistakes and the administrative actions against him were put into his restricted/ local file; showing his subsequent success.  He has received multiple awards and recognitions since his initial misgivings.  He was retired (1 September 2016) with an honorable discharge.

	d.  He feels the AGDRB's decision was weighed too heavily on his regrettable mistakes rather than his overall performance as a CPT.  He requests the Board’s support and understanding in correcting this mistake that is more than just pride and ego for him.  Approximately half of his career was in the grade of O-3E.  He believes that this time period was truly successful in its totality. 

3.  Review of the applicant’s service record shows:

	a.  Having prior enlisted service, he was appointed in the U.S. Army Reserve, as a second lieutenant, on 9 October 2003, and entered active duty on the same date.  He was promoted to CPT on 20 January 2007.

	b.  On 14 June 2010, he accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) for wrongfully consuming more than two alcoholic beverages in 1 day and while off base.  His punishment consisted of a written reprimand.  The Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 15 June 2010, stated the following:

		(1)  “You were so intoxicated that you had difficulty following instructions and failed the standard field sobriety test.  You refused to submit to a blood alcohol test (BAT) and therefore, you were ordered to do so by the ADAB Magistrate.  The BAT revealed your blood contained 220 mg/dL of ethanol — this is nearly three times the legal limit of 80 mg/dL, and would be considered an aggravated driving under the influence offense in most states.”

		(2)  He did not appeal.  The imposing authority directed the NJP for filing in the performance section of his official military personnel file (OMPF).

	c.  On 22 March 2013, he was identified to the Fiscal Year Major Promotion Board and to show cause for his retention on active duty.  On 14 June 2013, an officer elimination board recommended his retention on active duty.

	d.  On 25 October 2013, the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB), after careful reconsideration, voted to transfer the Article 15, dated 14 June 2001 and punitive LOR, dated 15 June 2010, and all allied documents, in that the intended purpose had been served and in the best interest of the Army, to the restricted portion of his OMPF.

	e.  He requested a voluntarily retirement on an unknown date.  

	f.  On 10 May 2016 (AR20160002121), the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, Review Boards, after review by the AGDRB, determined his service in the grade of O-3E (CPT) was not satisfactory and directed his placement on the Retired List in the next lower grade of O-2E (1LT), under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), sections 1370 and 1407(f).

	g.  Orders Number 145-0001, dated 25 May 2016, issued by Headquarters, Army Support Activity, Fort Dix, NJ, announced his separation effective 31 August 2016 and placement on the Retired List in the grade of 1LT effective 1 September 2016.

	h.  His DD Form 214 shows he was honorably retired, in the rank/grade of CPT/O-3, on 31 August 2016, by reason of nonselection for permanent promotion.  

4.  By law (Title 10, USC, section 1370), a commissioned officer of the Army who is retired shall be retired in the highest grade in which the member served on active duty satisfactorily (or, in the case of a member of the National Guard, in which the member served on full-time National Guard duty satisfactorily), as determined by the Secretary of the Army.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found the relief was not warranted.  The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. The Board agreed commissioned officers are held at a high standard in which he did not meet standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.  Based upon the preponderance of the evidence, the Board determined there was no error or injustice in this case, and do not recommend amending the previous Board’s decision.

BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

X	X	X	DENY APPLICATION



BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20160002121 on 10 May 2016.
	 
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.


REFERENCES:

Army Regulation 15-80 (Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) and Grade Determinations) establishes policies, procedures, and responsibilities for the AGDRB and other organizations delegated authority to make grade determinations on behalf of the Secretary of the Army.  The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs), after consultation with the Army Chief of Staff, will appoint general officers for the AGDRB, which the Secretary of the Army will direct to consider cases involving general officers.  The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) retains the authority to take final action in any case in which a subordinate authority, including the AGDRB, would otherwise be authorized to take final action.

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20170008939


4


1