IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 May 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140003826 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 to upgrade the characterization of her service from general, under honorable conditions to fully honorable, and to change the narrative reason for her discharge. The applicant also requested for medical retirement and restore the funds recouped per 10 USC § 2006. 2. The applicant states, in effect, she has chronic Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 4 March 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 25 March 2011 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Unacceptable Conduct, AR 600-8-24, Paragraph 4-2b JNC, NA e. Unit of assignment: E Co, 2nd Bn, 46th Infantry, 194th Armored Bde Fort Knox, KY f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 8 August 2002, indefinite g. Current Enlistment Service: 8 years, 7 months, 18 days h. Total Service: 16 years, 5 months, 16 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: RA (941003-970618) / HD 02-08-19 RA (970619-980715) / HD 03-09-13 RA (980716-990901) / HD 04-10-29 x 4 years k. Highest Grade Achieved: O-3 l. Military Occupational Specialty: 14A, Air Defense Artillery m. GT Score: NA n. Education: Bachelor of Arts o. Overseas Service: Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Germany, and Korea p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: ARCOM-3; AAM-4; AGCM-2; NDSM; AFEM; GWOTSM KCM-CS; KDSM; NPDR; ASR; OSR; NATO MDL r. Administrative Separation Board: Yes s. Performance Ratings: Yes t. Counseling Statements: NIF u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 October 1994, and was commissioned on 8 August 2002, through OCS. She was 27 years old at the time of entry and had a Bachelor of Arts degree. She was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 14A, Air Defense Artillery. She served in Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Germany, and Korea. She earned three ARCOMs and five AAMs. She completed 16 years, 5 months, and 16 days of active duty service. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The evidence of record shows that on 8 September 2009, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b, AR 600-8-24, by reason of misconduct, moral or professional dereliction. 2. The applicant was directed to show cause for retention in the Army for the following incidents: a. Pleading guilty (080414), to a violation of a state statue, operating a motor vehicle with a BAC above .08, including an acknowledgement that her blood alcohol content was over .18, an aggravating circumstance. She was sentenced to a four-day confinement, $698 fine and suspension of license and driving privileges for 120 days. As a result, she received a GOMOR (080428) for filing in her OMPF. b. Wrongfully using cocaine (090417), in violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ. c. Receiving an Article 15 (090702) with a punishment consisting of forfeiture of $2,922 per month for two months. d. Receiving a GOMOR (090702), for filing in her OMPF. 3.. She was advised that she could submit a voluntary resignation in lieu of elimination, submit a rebuttal and request an appearance before a Board of Inquiry, or apply for retirement, if otherwise eligible. 4. On 20 May 2010, the applicant appeared with counsel before a Board of Inquiry (Show Cause Board). The Board found the applicant committed an act of personal misconduct by wrongfully using cocaine and engaged in conduct unbecoming an officer. The Board recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 5. The DA Ad Hoc Review Board recommended the applicant’s elimination action be accepted with issuance of a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 6. On 24 February 2010, The Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards), in consideration of the Physical Evaluation Board’s (PEB) approved findings, and superseding the previous decision document, dated 17 September 2010, 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. 7. On 17 September 2010, the Acting 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. 8. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 25 March 2011, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 9. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. Case files for approved separation, dated 24 February 2011. 2. DA Directed Elimination Action file, dated 21 September 2010. 3. A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, dated 28 April 2008, for driving while intoxicated. 4. Two Service School Academic Evaluation Reports, dated 6 February 2003 and 6 September 2005, indicates the applicant achieved the course standards of the ADA Officer Basic and the AMD Captains Career Courses, respectively. 5. Ten OERs, the latter four OERS were referred reports covering the period 27 February 2007 through 19 February 2011. The remaining previous six reports were rated as either outstanding or satisfactory performances, and best qualified or fully capable from the senior raters. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a brief self-authored statement. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant provided none. 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. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service under conditions other than honorable. An officer will normally receive an under other than honorable conditions when they resign for the good of the service, are dropped from the rolls of the Army, are involuntarily separated due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or for the final revocation of a security clearance as a result of an act or acts of misconduct. 5. 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, paragraph 4-2b, unacceptable conduct. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge and to change the narrative reason for her discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicant’s record of service and the issue submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge or to change the narrative reason for her discharge. 2. The record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her 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 the serious incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of her 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 her 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’s service record contains documentation that supports a diagnosis of in service Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD); however, a careful review of the entire record reveals that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. Further, the Physical Evaluation Board’s approved findings were previously considered by the separation authority. 5. The applicant’s request for a medical retirement and to restore the funds recouped per 10 USC § 2006 is not within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. However, that request would be forwarded to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) for their consideration. 6. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 7. 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: 6 May 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? No Counsel: Mr. Andrew R. Rutz, 1320 Johnson Street, Marion, Indiana 46952 Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 2 No Change: 3 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) AR20140003826 Page 2 of 6 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1