ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 28 October 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190012118 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * removal of the general officer memorandum of reprimand (GOMOR) dated 29 September 2003, from the restricted folder of his Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR) * removal of the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) memorandum, dated 1 April 2019, from the performance folder of his AMHRR * in the alternative, transfer of the DASEB memorandum to the restricted folder of his AMHRR * in the alternative, correction of the DASEB memorandum to show the date of the GOMOR as 29 September 2003 instead of 9 August 2018 APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552) * Memorandums, Applicant, dated 6 October 2014 and 2 July 2019 * Memorandums, Headquarters, 25th Infantry Division (Light) and U.S. Army Hawaii, Schofield Barracks, HI, dated 29 September 2003 and 1 December 2003, subject: Reprimand * DA Forms 2166-8 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER)) covering the periods 29 August 2014 through 10 April 2015 and 11 April 2015 through 17 December 2015 * Memorandum, Army Review Boards Agency, Arlington, VA, dated 9 February 2015, subject: Resolution of Unfavorable Information – (Applicant), AR20140017834 * Letter, Army Review Boards Agency, dated 9 February 2015 * Record of Proceedings Docket Number AR20140017834, DASEB, dated 15 January 2015 * Memorandum, Army Review Boards Agency, Arlington, VA, dated 9 February 2015, subject: Resolution of Unfavorable Information – (Applicant), AR20180010923 * DA Forms 2166-9-2 (NCOER (SSG-1SG/MSG)) covering the periods 18 December 2015 through 4 January 2017, 5 January 2017 through 14 May 2017, and 15 May 2017 through 14 May 2018 * Benjamin Harrison Medal for Excellence in Academics, Physical Fitness, and Leadership Certificate, The Adjutant General's Corps Regimental Association, dated 28 July 2016, Senior Leader Course Distinguished Honor Graduate * Distinguished Honor Graduate Certificate, U.S. Army Soldier Support Institute NCO Academy, dated 29 July 2016, Senior Leader Course * Commandant's List Certificate, U.S. Army Soldier Support Institute NCO Academy, dated 29 July 2016, Senior Leader Course * Meritorious Service Medal Certificates, dated 27 March 2017 and 22 March 2019 * DA Forms 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 6 July 2015 and 21 March 2019 * Photograph, Applicant with Command Sergeant Major of the Army FACTS: 1. The applicant states: * he has served successfully in the U.S. Army since receiving the GOMOR on 29 September 2003 * it would be an injustice for the GOMOR to remain in his restricted folder and affect his promotion in the U.S. Army * he requested transfer the GOMOR to the restricted folder of his AMHRR on 6 October 2014 and the DASEB granted his request on 9 February 2015 * he requested permanently removal of the GOMOR from the restricted folder of his AMHRR on 9 August 2018 and the DASEB denied his request on 1 April 2019 * the GOMOR remained in the restricted folder of his AMHRR and a memorandum outlining the reasons why DASEB denied his request to remove the GOMOR was placed in the performance folder of his AMHRR * the DASAEB memorandum denying his 2018 request shows the date the GOMOR was issued as 9 August 2018 when in fact the actual date of the GOMOR is 29 September 2003 * the discrepancy in the referenced DASEB memorandum showing the wrong issue date of the GOMOR could lead to his separation from active duty under the Quality Management Program, which would end his career * the GOMOR was issued to him 16 years ago and he has not had any disciplinary actions against him since then * he has received several commendations and promotions since that time * the GOMOR has served its purpose and is no longer reflective of is current performance or conduct? 2. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 February 2003. 3. On 29 September 2003, the Commanding General, Headquarters, 25th Infantry Division (Light) and U.S. Army Hawaii reprimanded him in writing for driving a motor vehicle on 27 September 2003 when his blood alcohol content was .083 percent and for wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the age of 21. He was 19 years old at the time and serving in the rank/grade of private first class/E-3. 4. On 9 October 2003, he acknowledged that he read and understood the unfavorable information and elected not to submit matters for the commanding general's consideration in reaching the appropriate filing decision. 5. On 1 December 2003 after fully considering the circumstances of the case as well as alternative non-punitive measures, the commanding general directed filing the GOMOR in the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). 6. His Enlisted Record Brief shows his overseas/deployment combat duty as: * Iraq from 18 January 2004 through 12 February 2005 * Iraq from 13 May 2006 through 16 February 2007 * Iraq from 30 April 2008 through 19 July 2009 7. He provided copies of his last five NCOERs. a. His staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 NCOER covering the period 29 August 2014 through 10 April 2015 shows his rater marked "EXCELLENCE" in all blocks in Part IV (Values/NCO Responsibilities). In Part IVd (Leadership), his rater commented, in part: "selected as the Portland recruiting BN [Battalion] NCO of the 4th QTR FY14 [4th Quarter, Fiscal Year 2014] and BN [Battalion] NCO of the Year FY14 [Fiscal Year 2014]; chosen above 167 other NCOs." His rater marked "AMONG THE BEST" for Overall Potential for Promotion and/or Service in Positions of Greater Responsibility. His senior rater commented: "promote to SFC [sergeant first class] now; already selected for Center Leader position"; "send to SLC [Senior Leader Course] now"; "possesses stellar leadership abilities to handle increased responsibility"; and "number one SSG in the company that I senior rate, undoubtedly my number one choice for promotion." His senior rater marked "Successful/1" for Overall Performance and "Superior/1" for Overall Potential for Promotion and/or Service in Positions of Greater Responsibility. b. His SSG/E-6 NCOER covering the period 11 April 2015 through 17 December 2015 shows his rater marked "EXCELLENCE" in all blocks in Part IV (Values/NCO Responsibilities). In Part IVa (Competence), his rater commented, in part: "the most successful Center Leader in the company with regards to mission accomplishment; inherited the worst center in the BDE [brigade] and made it #1." His rater marked "AMONG THE BEST" for Overall Potential for Promotion and/or Service in Positions of Greater Responsibility. His senior rater commented, in part: "recently selected for promotion to Sergeant First Class"; "epitomizes what every NCO should be; aggressive, intelligent, professional; number 2 out of 7 Center Leaders that I senior rate"; and "performance throughout rating period has been outstanding; has turned a struggling center into the most successful center in the Battalion." His senior rater marked "Successful/1" for Overall Performance and "Superior/1" for Overall Potential for Promotion and/or Service in Positions of Greater Responsibility. c. His SFC/E-7 NCOER covering the period 18 December 2015 through 4 January 2017 shows his rater marked "FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD" in all blocks in Part IV (Performance Evaluation, Professionalism, Attributes, and Competencies). His rater marked "FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD" for Rated NCO's Overall Performance Compared to Others in the Same Grade Whom You Have Rated in Your Career. His senior rater commented: "[Applicant] has truly unlimited potential for future service and is a future Army senior leader. He is the #2 SFC in the company. Promote now and place in a First Sergeant position immediately." His senior rater marked "MOST QUALIFIED" for Headquarters, Department of the Army, Senior Rater Profile Comparison. d. His SFC/E-7 NCOER covering the period 5 January 2017 through 14 May 2017 shows the rater marked "FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD" in four of the five blocks in Part IV (Performance Evaluation, Professionalism, Attributes, and Competencies). His rater marked "FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD" for Rated NCO's Overall Performance Compared to Others in the Same Grade Whom You Have Rated in Your Career. His senior rater commented: "[Applicant] is the epitome of an Army leader. Promote immediately and assign as a Company First Sergeant. He is #2 of the 10 SFC's I Senior Rate. He will immediately improve any organization he is assigned to." His senior rater marked "HIGHLY QUALIFIED" for Headquarters, Department of the Army, Senior Rater Profile Comparison. e. His SFC/E-7 NCOER covering the period 15 May 2017 through 14 May 2018 shows his rater marked "FAR EXCEEDED STANDARD" in four of the five blocks in Part IV (Performance Evaluation, Professionalism, Attributes, and Competencies). His rater marked "EXCEEDED STANDARD" for Rated NCO's Overall Performance Compared to Others in the Same Grade Whom You Have Rated in Your Career. His senior rater commented: "Exclusive performance, #2 of 14 Station Commanders that I senior rate. Promote [Applicant] to E-8 now due to his unlimited leadership potential, send him to the Master Leader Course, and immediately assign him as a USAREC [U.S. Army Recruiting Command] First Sergeant. [Applicant] will be a CSM [command sergeant major]." 8. On 15 January 2015, the DASEB granted his request to transfer the GOMOR, dated 29 September 2003, to the restricted folder of his AMHRR. a. The DASEB determined: * the applicant received the GOMOR over 11 years ago * the applicant received several awards and recommendations since imposition of the GOMOR * the applicant received several successful NCOERs since imposition of the GOMOR ,reflecting outstanding duty performance with recommendations for promotion to the next grade * the applicant provided five character statements attesting to his outstanding character and potential for future service * the applicant had been promoted three times since imposition of the GOMOR, reflecting his professional growth and potential for future service * the applicant provided sufficient evidence showing the GOMOR had served its intended purpose and it was in the best interest of the Army to transfer the GOMOR to the restricted folder of his AMHRR at this time b. The DASEB further directed filing the decision memorandum and allied documents in the restricted folder of his AMHRR. 9. The DASEB memorandum to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command requesting transfer of the GOMOR to the restricted folder of the applicant's AMHRR, dated 9 February 2015, erroneously shows the GOMOR as being issued on 9 August 2018 (the date of the applicant's appeal) instead of 29 September 2003. 10. He was awarded the Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal on 18 September 2015 for exceptional volunteer service while serving as a recruiter for the Portland Recruiting Battalion from 30 August 2012 to 1 May 2015. 11. On 29 July 2016, he was the Distinguished Honor Graduate for the Recruiter Senior Leader Course. 12. On 27 March 2017, he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for exceptionally meritorious service while assigned as a Center Leader for the Portland Recruiting Battalion from 30 August 2012 to 19 April 2017. 13. His Enlisted Record Brief, dated 16 July 2018, shows he was awarded or authorized the following awards: * Meritorious Service Medal * Army Commendation Medal (5th Award) * Army Achievement Medal (3rd Award) * Valorous Unit Award (2nd Award) * Meritorious Unit Commendation * Navy Unit Commendation * Army Superior Unit Award * Army Good Conduct Medal (4th Award) * National Defense Service Medal * Iraq Campaign Medal with Combat Star * Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal * Global War on Terrorism Service Medal * Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal * NCO Professional Development Ribbon * Army Service Ribbon * Overseas Service Ribbon * Certificate of Achievement * Basic Recruiter Badge-Silver * Combat Action Badge * Driver and Mechanic Badge with Driver-W Bar (Wheeled Vehicles) * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar 14. On 22 March 2019, he was awarded a second Meritorious Service Medal for exceptionally meritorious achievement and outstanding performance as one of the top Station Commanders for the second quarter of Fiscal Year 2019 from 14 December 2018 to 14 March 2019. 15. On 26 March 2019, the DASEB denied the applicant's request to remove the GOMOR from the restricted folder of his AHMRR. The Board determined there was insufficient evidence to justify removal of the unfavorable information from his AMHRR restricted folder. The Board directed filing the decision memorandum in the applicant's AMHRR and the appeal documentation in the restricted folder of the applicant's AMHRR. 16. A review of the applicant's AHMRR shows the DASEB decision document is filed in his performance folder and the GOMOR is filed in his restricted folder. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board agreed that the evidence in this case supports a recommendation for relief. The Board noted the applicant has no record of misconduct subsequent to receiving a GOMOR on 29 September 2003. He has been promoted to a senior NCO grade, and his performance in the 16 years since receiving the GOMOR has been excellent. The Board concluded that, given the passage of time with no further misconduct and the excellent service the applicant has provided to the Nation and the U.S. Army, the GOMOR and any associated documents, to include DASEB correspondence, should be removed from his AMHRR. 2. The Board further concluded that these proceedings should not be filed in his AMHRR, and should only be retained within the Army Review Boards Agency's archive. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 :XX :XX :XX GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by removing from his Army Military Human Resource Record the general officer memorandum of reprimand dated 29 September 2003 and all associated documents, to include DASEB correspondence. 2. These proceedings will not be filed in the applicant's Army Military Human Resource Record, but will be maintained in the Army Review Boards Agency's system of records. 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: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Army Military Human Resource Records Management) prescribes policies governing the Army Military Human Resource Records Management Program. The AMHRR includes, but is not limited to, the OMPF, finance related documents, and non-service related documents deemed necessary to store by the Army. Paragraph 3-6 provides that once a document is properly filed in the AMHRR, the document will not be removed from the record unless directed by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records or other authorized agency. 2. Army Regulation 600-37 (Unfavorable Information) sets forth policies and procedures to ensure the best interests of both the Army and Soldiers are served by authorizing unfavorable information to be placed in, transferred within, or removed from an individual's AMHRR. a. An administrative memorandum of reprimand may be issued by an individual's commander, by superiors in the chain of command, and by any general officer or officer exercising general court-martial jurisdiction over the Soldier. The memorandum must be referred to the recipient and the referral must include and list applicable portions of investigations, reports, or other documents that serve as a basis for the reprimand. Statements or other evidence furnished by the recipient must be reviewed and considered before a filing determination is made. b. A memorandum of reprimand may be filed in a Soldier's AMHRR only upon the order of a general officer-level authority and is to be filed in the performance folder. The direction for filing is to be contained in an endorsement or addendum to the memorandum. If the reprimand is to be filed in the AMHRR, the recipient's submissions are to be attached. Once filed in the AMHRR, the reprimand and associated documents are permanent unless removed in accordance with chapter 7 (Appeals). c. Paragraph 7-2 (Policies and Standards) provides that once an official document has been properly filed in the AMHRR, it is presumed to be administratively correct and to have been filed pursuant to an objective decision by competent authority. Thereafter, the burden of proof rests with the individual concerned to provide evidence of a clear and convincing nature that the document is untrue or unjust, in whole or in part, thereby warranting its alteration or removal from the AMHRR. d. Paragraph 7-2d(3) (Transfers) shows, if the DASEB denies an appeal, a copy of the memorandum of notification regarding the denial will be placed in the commendatory and disciplinary portion of the performance record. The appeal itself and the record of proceedings will be placed in the restricted portion of the AMHRR. e. Only letters of reprimand, admonition, or censure may be the subject of an appeal for transfer to the restricted folder of the AMHRR. Such documents may be appealed on the basis of proof that their intended purpose has been served and that their transfer would be in the best interest of the Army. The burden of proof rests with the recipient to provide substantial evidence that these conditions have been met. 3. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial forum. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court- martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide BCM/NRs in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190012118 7 1