1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 March 2016 b. Date Received: 4 March 2016 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 inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 42 months of service with no other adverse action. Before his discharge, he discovered that he made the list for promotion to captain because this one incident was not reflected in his service record. The character of service and the narrative reason for his separation are causing him to struggle with job opportunities and careers. He accepted what happened to him and the disciplinary actions that followed. This one incident was out of character and cost him his military career. He desires to no longer struggle with job opportunities and careers in order to allow him to support his family. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 July 2016, 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, Chapter 4-2B / JNC / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 26 November 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 July 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, conduct unbecoming of an officer and for receiving adverse information filed in his Army Military Human Resource Record in accordance with AR 600- 37, due to the following reasons: On 7 December 2013, he consumed an excessive amount of alcohol while in the presence of several enlisted personnel from his organization at a local bar. Contrary to the agreed upon designated driver plan, he departed the establishment without informing the other Soldiers present of his intentions and elected to drive his own vehicle. On 8 December 2013, he recklessly operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol causing a motor vehicle accident and damaging a civilian's automobile. On 30 June 2014, an administrative reprimand was filed in his Army Military Human Resource Record for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 September 2014 / On 28 September 2014, the applicant requested a discharge in lieu of elimination, conditioned upon him receiving an honorable characterization of service. (5) GCMCA Recommendation Date / Characterization: 29 September 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) (6) DA Ad Hoc Review Board: 10 November 2014 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Appointment: 15 May 2011 / Indefinite b. Age at Appointment / Education / GT Score: 21 / Bachelor's Degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: O-2 / 74A 5P 2B, Chemical, General / 3 years, 6 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: 3 June 2011 - 5 April 2012 / Best Qualified 6 April 2012 - 5 April 2013 / Best Qualified 6 April 2013 - 5 April 2014 / Not Qualified 6 April 2014 - 26 November 2014 / Not Qualified h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 8 December 2014, reflects the applicant committed the offense of: Traffic Accident - With Serious Injuries (Off Post). Contact was made with the Clarksville Police Department (CPD) who related that their preliminary investigation revealed that the applicant while exiting the parking lot of the Two Rivers mall shopping center, turned onto Riverside Drive, failed to observe an oncoming vehicle causing a vehicle accident. The applicant was transported to Gateway Medical Center where he later was sent via a life flight to Vanderbilt medical center in critical condition. The CPD reported that the applicant was wearing his seatbelt and an alcoholic beverage was found in the vehicle. Alcohol was believed to be a contributing factor in the accident. Line of Duty Investigation Findings and Recommendations, dated 30 January 2014, reflects that on 7 December 2013, the applicant consumed several alcoholic beverages at a Soldier's residence, Wild Woody's (Clarksville, TN), and the Electric Cowboy (Clarksville, TN). His friends were unable to account for him at the Electric Cowboy. Shortly after midnight, the applicant was involved in a vehicular accident on Riverside Drive. Clarksville Police Department arrived at the scene and found an open container of cherry moonshine in the applicant's vehicle. The applicant was taken to Gateway Medical Hospital. At 0600 on 8 December 2013, blood and urine were collected from the applicant. His blood alcohol content was 0.17 and his urine was 0.19. The applicant was transferred to Vanderbilt Hospital because of significant injuries and cardiac arrest. The nature and extent of injuries reported were brain damage, cardiac arrest, pulmonary contusion, and sternum fracture. General Officer Memorandum Of Reprimand, dated 21 May 2014, for driving a motor vehicle on 8 December 2010, with a blood alcohol content of .17 percent. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 2 July 2014, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. The applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depressed Mood (Axis I); and, postconcussive syndrome; moderate TBI (Axis III). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 149, with all allied documents listed in block 9 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None 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. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members' discharges. "Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre- existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service." "Conditions documented in the record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which 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, 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 below that meriting an honorable discharge. 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, such that he should have been retained. Further, the applicant's record contains no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends the event that caused his discharge from the Army was an isolated incident. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Officers in the Army. Army Regulation 600-8-24, in pertinent part, stipulates there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 21 July 2016, 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 Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change f. 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 AR20160005244 1