IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  20 October 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140020641 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reversal of the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) decision to place her on the Retired List as a first lieutenant (1LT)/O2E instead of a captain (CPT)/O3E. 

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  In April 2013, prior to her retirement, the Army Grade Determination Board (ADGRB) reviewed her file and due to adverse information in her file, they placed her on the Retired List as a 1LT/O2E.

	b.  On 21 February 2008 she received nonjudicial punishment (NJP), which was placed in her restricted fiche, and a relief for cause officer evaluation report (OER) for the period from 16 December 2006 - 5 March 2008 for having engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a senior non-commissioned officer (NCO).  At the time, she was lonely and depressed due to a recent divorce.  The relationship negatively impacted her professional and personal life, and she admitted to the inappropriate relationship to her battalion commander, who then had to remove her from command and initiated a 15-6 investigation.

	c.  After the incident she vowed to recover and continue to serve her country with dignity.  Her performance in the Army was always exceptional and it improved greatly following the incident.  She learned from her mistakes and moved on, as evidenced by her continued excellence during her last 5 years in the Army, and she furthered her military and civilian education.  She received awards and was rated among the best on numerous evaluations as well as the number one CPT in command among five others.

	d.  On 3 June 2010, she was identified by the fiscal year 2010 (FY 2010) Career Field Designation Board to show cause for retention due to the referred officer evaluation report (OER) she received in March 2008.  She submitted matters in rebuttal to terminate the action with the recommendation from her chain of command to be retained on active duty.  On 15 April 2011, the Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, decided to continue the initiation of elimination action and returned the case back to the Commander, Headquarters, XVIII Airborne Corps for a Field Board of Inquiry (FBOI).  

	e.  On 27 July 2011, she appeared before the FBOI.  The FBOI recommended that she be retained in the Army and therefore the elimination action was closed.  During this time she was told by the board and her chain of command that if the FBOI recommended retention she would be able to continue serving and the adverse information would never be used against her again.

	f.  Since the incident she successfully completed the Military Police Captain's Career Course (MPCCC) and the Antiterrorism Force Protection Course.  She completed a 1-year tour in Kuwait, where she worked as a Military Police (MP) Operations Officer and was awarded a Meritorious Service Medal.  Her most significant achievement was having the honor and the privilege to command a Warrior Transition Company for 2 years where she was rated the top commander in the battalion and was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal.

	g.  She strongly believes that part of her success came from her past experience, and she was able to encourage other Soldiers to overcome any challenge.  Her non-selection for promotion due to the adverse action in her file ultimately caused her involuntary retirement.  She did everything in her power to overcome this mistake and she feels she served satisfactorily in the rank of CPT. She was recommended by her chain of command and the FBOI for continued service.  However, this one incident on her record forced her to retire and she was placed on the Retired List in the rank of 1LT/O2E.  She, as well as her chain of command, believes that she successfully served as a CPT/O3E with dignity, respect, and loyalty.

3.  The applicant provides:

* two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with effective dates of 18 June 2003 and 30 September 2013
* Officer Record Brief

* a memorandum, dated 13 December 2007, from the Commander, 
16th MP Brigade (Airborne)
* two DA Forms 268 (Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (Flag)), dated 13 December 2007 and 29 February 2008
* DA Form 1574 (Report of Proceeding by Investigating Officer/Board of Officers), dated 19 December 2007
* DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ)
* a general officer memorandum of reprimand (GOMOR), dated 
28 February 2008
* eight DA Forms 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report) 
* DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 
11 December 2008
* a memorandum, dated 10 March 2008, from the 16th MP Brigade (Airborne)
* a memorandum, dated 3 June 2010, from U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC)
* her statement, dated 30 June 2010, in rebuttal to elimination proceedings
* a memorandum, dated 1 July 2010, from the Commander, Warrior Transition Battalion (WTB), Womack Army Medical Center (WAMC), Fort Bragg, NC
* a memorandum, dated 8 July 2010, from the acting commander of WAMC
* a memorandum, dated19 July 2010, from Headquarters, XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Bragg
* a memorandum, dated 15 April 2011, from HRC
* two memoranda, dated 2 June 2011, from Headquarters, Fort Bragg
* DA  Form 1574, dated 27 July 2011
* three memoranda, dated 25 August 2011, from Headquarters, Fort Bragg
* a memorandum, dated 22 November 2011, from HRC to the applicant
* a memorandum, dated 4 October 2012, from the applicant to the President, FY (fiscal year) 2013, Maneuver Fires and Effects (MFE) Promotion Selection Board
* a memorandum, dated 7 March 2013, from HRC, subject: Mandatory Retirement Date Due to Non-Selection for Promotion
* a memorandum, dated 23 April 2013, from the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA)
* a memorandum, dated 29 April 2013, from the applicant to ARBA
* a memorandum, dated 29 May 2013, from the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Review Boards) (DASA (RB))
* four award certificates
* orders for the awards of the Senior and Master Parachutist Badges
* DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), dated 7 May 2012
* college transcripts
* nine certificates for completion of military courses
* Summary of Retired Pay Account from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)
* documents correcting her pay grade on her retirement orders

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  She previously served 9 years, 8 months, and 28 days of active service in the Regular Army.  On 19 June 2003, she was commissioned a second lieutenant in the MP Branch.  

2.  On 6 March 2005, she completed a 12 month tour in Iraq.

3.  She was promoted to CPT on 1 August 2006.

4.  On 23 January 2007, she received an OER for the period 16 April 2006 - 
15 December 2006.  She was assigned as the executive officer of the 42nd MP Detachment, Fort Bragg.  Her rater was the detachment commander and her senior rater was the battalion commander. 

	a.  In Part IVa (Army Values) and Part IVb (Leader attributes/skills/actions) all blocks are checked "YES."

	b.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va (Evaluate the Rated Officer's Performance during the Rating Period and his/her Potential for Promotion) as "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote."  In Part Vc (Comment on Potential for Promotion) her rater stated:  

[The applicant] is a poised and mature leader who has proven that she can command a company now.  She is an extraordinary officer with unlimited potential.  Promote now, send to MP Captains Career Couse (MPCCC), and return this  leader to Soldiers immediately.  She is a dynamic officer deserving of the most challenging combat support MP company.

	c.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa (Evaluate the Rated Officer's Promotion Potential to the Next Higher Grade) as "Best Qualified."  In Part VIIc (Comment on Performance/Potential) her senior rater stated:

[The applicant] is the best of six company executive officers that I senior rate.  Her personal standard is excellence as demonstrated by her efforts in ensuring the unit's maintenance program achieved and maintained a 98% operational readiness rate and by flawlessly leading the installation special reaction team during multiple high visibility operations and exercises.  Upon completion of her executive officer time, send her immediately to the MPCCC and select for company command of a combat support military police company.  She displays limitless potential and is one of the best.

	d.  In Part VIId (List Three Future Assignments for Which this Officer is Best Suited) her senior rater listed Company Commander, Assistant Battalion S3, Battalion S4.  

5.  On 10 February 2007, she was assigned as the detachment commander of Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment (HHD), 503rd MP Battalion, at 
Fort Bragg, NC.  

6.  On 1 August 2007, she was awarded the Senior Parachutist Badge.

7.  On 7 November 2007, she was awarded the Army Achievement Medal for exceptionally meritorious service while assigned as a detachment commander from 14 December 2006 - 7 November 2007.

8.  On 12 December 2007, she was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 16th MP Brigade, at Fort Bragg.

9.  On 13 December 2007, a flag was initiated on her record due to adverse action.

10.  On 13 December 2007, the Commander, 16th MP Brigade, appointed a lieutenant colonel (LTC) as the investigating officer (IO) pursuant to Army Regulation 15-6 (Procedures for Investigating Officers and Boards of Officers) to investigate the facts and circumstances surrounding allegations of possible fraternization within HHD, 501st (sic) MP Battalion.  The IO, after investigating allegations of possible fraternization within HHD, 503rd MP Battalion, found:

	a.  The HHD commander (the applicant) and the battalion command sergeant major (CSM) (CSM G) violated Article 134 (Fraternization) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) by engaging in consensual sexual intercourse with each other.  This sexual relationship began in the summer of 2007 and continued until or around early November 2007.

   b.  Rumors were wide-spread within HHD of an inappropriate relationship between the applicant and CSM G, but there was no evidence that any other had any direct, first-hand knowledge of a relationship that could be clearly defined as inappropriate.
   c.  There was no evidence that the personal relationship between the applicant and CSM G had either adversely or favorably affected the assignment, promotion, or professional development of any Soldier currently assigned or previously assigned to the 503rd MP Battalion.
   
   d.  There was no evidence that fraternization had occurred among other members of HHD, 503rd MP Battalion.
   
11.  The IO recommended action against the applicant and CSM G for inappropriate conduct be routed through the general officer chain of command for appropriate disposition.

12.  The appointing authority approved the findings and recommendations of the IO.  The appointing authority recommended the following action be taken against the applicant and CSM G:

	a.  The applicant be removed from command immediately (the unit was to deploy to Iraq in mid-January 2008) and given a general officer Article 15.  It was noted she was a prior enlisted Soldier with a combined time in service of approximately 15 years.

	b.  CSM G be relieved from his CSM duties with the 503rd MP Battalion, removed from the CSM program, given a general officer Article 15, and retired from active duty or transferred from Fort Bragg.

13.  A memorandum, dated 8 January 2008, from Headquarters, 503rd MP Battalion concerns her suspension of her duties as the commander of HHD, 503rd MP Battalion.  

	a.  On 13 December 2007, she was temporarily suspended from her duties as the Commander, HHD, 503rd MP Battalion.  Permission was sought by the Commander, 16th MP Brigade, from the Commanding General, XVIII Airborne Corps, to officially suspend her from her duties.

	b.  On 5 January 2008, the Commanding General, XVIII Airborne Corps, approved the request to suspend her of her duties pending the outcome of an 
AR 15-6 investigation into allegations of her involvement in an inappropriate relationship.

14.  On 21 February 2008, she accepted NJP from the Commanding General, XVIII Airborne Corps, for failing to obey a lawful order by having a wrongful inappropriate personal relationship with CSM G between on or about 1 June 2007 and on or about 31 October 2007.  Her punishment consisted of a written reprimand.

15.  On 28 February 2008, the Commanding General, XVIII Airborne Corps, issued her a general officer letter of reprimand (GOMOR).  

	a.  He presided over her Article 15 hearing on 21 February 2008 and found her guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, of violating Article 92 of the UCMJ by engaging in a wrongful inappropriate personal relationship with CSM G and in a sexual relationship over a 5-month period.  During that time she was a company commander and CSM G was the Battalion CSM.  Her relationship was detrimental to the battalion in that it caused numerous rumors and distractions during a time in which the battalion was preparing to deploy to Afghanistan.

	b.  As an officer in the U.S. Army she was expected to be a role model and to adhere to the highest standards of professional and personal behavior.  Her actions caused him to lose confidence in her judgment, integrity, and leadership ability.  She brought discredit upon herself, her unit, the Officer Corps, and the Armed Forces.

	c.  This reprimand was imposed as punishment under Article 15, UCMJ.

16.  On 29 February 2008, the flag on her record was removed effective 
25 February 2008.

17.  On 10 March 2008, she received a relief for cause OER for the period 
16 December 2006 - 5 March 2008.  She was assigned as the detachment commander for HHD, 503rd MP Battalion.  Her rater was the battalion commander and her senior rater was the brigade commander. The OER indicates it is a referred report.  She acknowledged receipt of the OER and she indicated she did not wish to make comments.

	a.  In Part IVa the blocks for Honor, Integrity, Selfless Service, and Duty are checked "NO."

	b.  In Part IVb the blocks for Emotional, Conceptual, and Decision Making are checked "NO."

	c.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va as "Unsatisfactory Performance, do not promote)."  

   d.  In Part Vb the rater stated that after she had been given the opportunity to command as a junior CPT, she displayed great potential and performed reasonably well.  However, she had a significant and long-term lapse in judgment and integrity after admitting to an inappropriate relationship with a senior NCO in the unit during the rating period.  The inappropriate relationship went on for months and was accompanied by numerous lies and cover-ups which had an extremely negative impact on the unit just prior to deployment.  After an investigation concluded that she did engage in an inappropriate relationship, she was relieved of command of HHD, 503rd MP Battalion.
   
   e.  Her rater stated in Part Vc, she should be closely supervised in staff positions for the remainder of her career.  Do not promote.

	f.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa as "Do Not Promote."   

18.  On 1 July 2008, she received an OER for the period 6 March 2008 - 27 June 2008.  She was assigned as the Assistant Brigade S4 (logistic officer).  Her rater was the Brigade S4 and her senior rater was the Deputy Brigade Commander. 

	a.  In Parts IVa and IVb all blocks are checked "YES."

	b.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va as "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote."  In Part Vc her rater stated she had unlimited potential.  After completion of MPCCC she should be placed in positions of increasing responsibility to further develop.

	c.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa as "Best Qualified."  In Part VIIc her senior rater stated:

A solid performance by a high performing officer.  [The applicant] assumed tough duties that require attention to detail and follow through at a critical time in the brigade.  Her tenacity and aggressiveness were instrumental to the success of the ORA in the GPC and DTS programs.  [The applicant] has good potential and will become an extremely high performing staff officer upon completion of the Career Captains Course.  Continue to challenge with tough assignments.

19.  On 22 August 2009, she received an OER for the period 28 June 2008 - 
27 June 2009.  She was assigned as the Antiterrorism/Force Protection Officer of the G36 Protection Directorate for U.S. Army Central Command in Kuwait.  Her rater was the Deputy Provost Marshal and her senior rater was the Director, G36 Protection Directorate. 



	a.  In Parts IVa and IVb all blocks are checked "YES."

	b.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va as "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote."  In Part Vc her rater stated she had unlimited potential.  The applicant was an energetic officer who actively searches for opportunities to grow personally and professionally.  Select for a Combat Support MP Company command now and promote below the zone to major (MAJ).  She will excel.

	c.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa as "Best Qualified."  In Part VIIc her senior rater stated:

Superb performance.  [The applicant] is one of the top Captains in the Directorate and in the top 5% of the Captains I've serve with in over 
25 years.  Confident, competent and agile describe her leadership characteristics when faced with the toughest challenges.  [The applicant] energetically assisted in the development of mitigation measures designed to address over 150 Force Protection vulnerabilities identified by internal and external inspections.  Her efforts insured the command's limited resources were focused on the priority projects; saving time and money.  [The applicant] is ready to command Soldiers now.  Promote to Major ahead of her peers.  Boundless potential.

20.  On 12 December 2009, she was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for exceptionally meritorious service in support Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom while assigned as the G36, Protection Provost Marshal Operations Officer in Kuwait from 28 January 2009 - 8 January 2010.

21.  On 28 December 2009, she received an OER for the period 28 June 2009 - 7 January 2010.  She was assigned as the Antiterrorism/Force Protection Officer of the G36 Protection Directorate for U.S. Army Central Command in Kuwait.  Her rater was the AT/FP Officer and her senior rater was the Deputy Provost Marshal.

   a.  In Parts IVa and IVb all blocks are checked "YES."

	b.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va as "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote."  In Part Vc her rater stated she had unlimited potential.  Her performance mandates immediate selection for promotion to major (MAJ).  This officer has the potential to command with distinction at any level



	c.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa as "Best Qualified."  In Part VIIc her senior rater stated:

[The applicant] is clearly the best captain in this division.  Moreover, she is in the top 2% of all captains I've served with in my 21 years of military service.  Because of her many talents, she was always the first choice for complex, high visibility missions such as leading USARCENT's Red Team in conducting vulnerability assessments and mitigating risks of all the camp in the Kuwait AO.  [The applicant] has easily grasped the operational and strategic aspects of the USARCENT mission.  An outstanding warrior with unlimited potential, she is an absolute must select for command of a tactical MP Company.  Promote below the zone to MAJ and sent to ILE/CSC.

22.  On 8 January 2010, she completed a 12-month tour of duty in Kuwait.

23.  On 23 February 2010, she was assigned as the company commander of Company B, Warrior Transition Battalion (WTB), Fort Bragg.

24.  On 3 June 2010, HRC notified her that she had been identified by the 
FY 2010 Major, Army, Maneuver Fires and Effects (MFE) Promotion Selection Board to show cause for retention on active duty.  This action was based on a series of substantiated derogatory activity resulting in a referred OER for the period 16 December 2006 through 5 March 2008.  She elected to submit a statement in her behalf.

25.  On 30 June 2010, she provided a rebuttal to the elimination proceedings.

	a.  She requested she be retained on active duty.  She regretted her actions and understood the effects they had on good order and military discipline.  Her actions were inexcusable and she accepted full responsibility.

	b.  Since the incident she worked hard to prove herself to the Army and successfully overcome the disgrace she caused to her unit, the Officer Corps, and herself.  She admitted she should have never engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a senior NCO, the Battalion CSM.  At the time she was lonely and depressed due to a recent divorce.  The relationship became both verbally and physically abusive.  The relationship negatively impacted her professional and personal life and she had no choice but to admit to the inappropriate relationship to the battalion commander in order to break free of the CSM's control.  

	c.  She had learned that she needed to be more in control of her emotions, and to take the path that demonstrated true leadership.  Mental and emotional toughness are as much a part of leadership as military knowledge and battlefield skill.  She displayed this learned toughness every day she was afforded the opportunity to serve in the Army.

	d.  She received a GOMOR which was placed in her restricted file and a relief for cause OER.  She vowed to regain the trust and respect of the Army and her family.  Her performance had always been exceptional and improved greatly following the GOMOR.  She learned from her mistake and moved on, as evidenced by her continue excellence on her last three OERs.

	e.  She strongly believed that her chain of command's intent was to allow her to continue with her military career.  After the incident she successfully completed the MPCCC and Antiterrorism Couse.  She completed a 1-year tour in Kuwait as the MP Operations Officer and she was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal.  Her most significant achievement has been commanding a Warrior Transition Company.

26.  On 1 July 2010, her battalion commander recommended that she be retained in the Army.  She was a consummate professional and the most mature and level headed company commander within the battalion.  She consistently demonstrated complete dedication to one of the most complex missions in the Army.  She had taken full responsibility for her previous actions and he had complete confidence in her ability to continue outstanding service to the Army and Soldiers.

27.  On 8 July 2010, the acting commander of WAMC concurred with the WTB commander and recommended the applicant be retained in the Army.  Although she had a serious lapse of judgment, she is the most effective company commander in the WTB.  She has the potential to be an outstanding leader and a tremendous asset for the Army and the WTB.

28.  On 19 July 2010, the brigade commander recommended HRC terminate the show cause proceedings against the applicant and retain her in the Army.

29.  On 23 January 2011, she received an OER for the period 8 January 2010 - 
2 November 2010.  She was assigned as the Company Commander for Bravo Company, WTB.  Her rater was the Battalion Commander and her senior rater was the Commander, Womack Army Medical Center (WAMC). 

	a.  In Parts IVa and IVb all blocks are checked "YES."

	b.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va as "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote."  In Part Vc her rater stated she had unlimited potential.  He stated she should be promoted to MAJ now and sent to resident intermediate level education (ILE).

	c.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa as "Best Qualified."  In Part VIIc her senior rater stated:

Outstanding performance by one of our most proficient leaders.  [The applicant] ranks in the top 10% of all Company Grade officers with whom I have served in 26 years of service.  She is one of the best company commanders in the Warrior Transition Battalion and the entire Womack Army Medical Center.  She is an extremely capable officer that quickly makes a difference in this most complex organization.  Her innate ability to set the condition for the healing and transition process for each one of her Soldiers in the extremely complex mission of the Warrior Transition Battalion demonstrates her total dedication and exception leadership abilities.  Unlimited potential.  Assign to the toughest and most demanding jobs our Army has to offer - she will succeed.  Continue to groom for battalion command.  Promote to major ahead of peers and select for resident ILE.

30.  On 15 April 2011, the Commander, HRC reviewed the applicant's rebuttal and all relevant documentation, including the recommendations of her chain of command and decided to continue with the initiation of elimination processing of her case.  Her case was returned to the brigade commander for a board of inquiry to be conducted.

31.  On 27 July 2011, an FBOI was convened.  The WTB CSM; the first sergeant (1SG) for Company B; and the battalion commander, WTB, testified on her behalf.

	a.  The CSM stated all of his interactions with the applicant had been very positive and he considered her to be one of his best commanders.  She was a very compassionate leader and had a great working relationship with two 1SGs she has had.  He was aware of the previous incident and stated if one takes responsibility for their actions and improves and get better every day he looks at it as something in the past.  The incident happened, she learned from it, and he thought it made her a better commander.  He recommended she not be eliminated from the Army.


	b.  The 1SG stated he interacted with her daily.  He felt she was an outstanding leader.  She had a lot of compassion and lead from the front.  She set the tone for the company and took care of the Soldiers.  She was the first one in and the last one out for work.  She did a lot of research and made sure she had all the facts before making a decision.  She definitely went out of her way to take care of Soldiers and their families.  He stated she should definitely be retained in the Army.  She was the type of leader the military needed today.  She led from the front and she was the primary reason the company was the number one company in the battalion.

	c.  The battalion commander stated she was a model company commander and his best company commander.  Of his 5 companies, her company had consistently had the lowest number of high risk Soldiers.  Base on her positive influence, mitigation skills, and leadership, her company had half the number of high risk Soldiers than her sister companies.  She knew what was going on with her Soldiers and was genuinely concerned for them and knew the details about what was going on with her Soldiers.  There was never a time when he talked with her that she could not provide him information or details about a Soldier in her company.

	d.  The FBOI found that the applicant did engage in misconduct based on engaging in an inappropriate relationship and fraternization with a senior NCO during the summer of 2007 to early November 2007 resulting in a referred OER.  

	e.  It was the opinion of the FBOI that she had learned from her lapse in judgment and had the potential to be an outstanding officer and an asset to the U.S. Army.  The FBOI recommended she be retained in the U.S. Army.

   f.  On 25 August 2011, the appointing authority approved the findings and recommendation of the FBOI to retain the applicant.
   
32.  On 25 August 2011, Headquarters, Fort Bragg, recommended that the elimination action pertaining to the applicant be closed.  In accordance with the recommendation of the FBOI, the applicant was to be retained on active duty in the U.S. Army.  The applicant was notified of this decision in writing on 25 August 2011.

33.  On 7 October 2011, she received an OER for the period 3 November 2010 - 
9 July 2011.  She was assigned as the Company Commander for Bravo Company, WTB.  Her rater was the Battalion Commander and her senior rater was the Commander, WAMC. 

	a.  In Parts IVa and IVb all blocks are checked "YES."
	b.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va as "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote."  In Part Vc her rater stated she had unlimited potential.  He stated she should be promoted to MAJ now and sent to resident intermediate level education (ILE).

	c.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa as "Best Qualified."  In Part VIIc her senior rater stated:

Absolutely outstanding performance by the best company commander in the Warrior Transition Battalion and top Company Command under my command.  [The applicant's] tireless commitment to leading and caring for her Soldiers and Families is one of her key strengths.  Her combination of technical and interpersonal skills along with agile leadership are why she has demonstrated a consistent ability to execute her assigned missions well ahead of her peers.  She personally ensures that her Warriors and their Families are fully informed and utilize all of the resources available to them so that they may heal.  Unlimited potential.  This officer has demonstrated that she will succeed at the Army's toughest jobs.  Promote to Major immediately and send to resident ILE."

34.  On 22 November 2011, the applicant was notified by HRC that the FBOI determined that she would be retained in the U.S. Army.  Therefore, the elimination action was closed.
   
35.  On 2 May 2012, she was assigned to the Operations Company, XVIII Airborne Corps, Fort Bragg.

36.  On 17 May 2012, she was awarded the Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal for service from 6 September 2011 - 1 May 2012.

37.  On 31 May 2012, she was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for meritorious service as the commander, Bravo Company, WTB during the period from 25 March 2010 - 26 April 2012.

38.  On 25 July 2012, she received an OER for the period 8 July 2011 - 26 April 2012. She was assigned as the Company Commander for Bravo Company, WTB.  Her rater was the Battalion Commander and her senior rater was the Commander, WAMC. 

	a.  In Parts IVa and IVb all blocks are checked "YES."


	b.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va as "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote."  In Part Vc her rater stated:

This officer should be promoted immediately to Major and sent to resident ILE.  She will make an outstanding [battalion] XO and future [battalion commander].

	c.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa as "Best Qualified."  In Part VIIc her senior rater stated:

Simply outstanding performance and superior leadership by my best Company Commander and one of the finest company grade officers, branch immaterial, with whom I have served in 28 years.  [The applicant] clearly demonstrates in the complex environment of Warrior Care that positive results can be achieved through compassionate and caring leadership.  Her company continuously leads all others across all areas as demonstrated through several inspections and staff assistance visits.  Soldiers, Staff and Families are inspired by her leadership and invested in success throughout the command.  Unlimited potential.  This officer will succeed in any challenging environment.  Promote to MAJ now and assign to important no-fail missions.  Send to resident ILE. 

39.  On 7 March 2013, HRC notified the applicant she was not selected for promotion by the FY 2013, MAJ, MFE Promotion Selection Board.  HRC established her mandatory retirement date (MRD) as 30 September 2013.  She elected a voluntary retirement to be effective not later than her MRD of 
30 September 2013.

40.  On 8 March 2013, she requested to be released from active duty and assignment on 30 September 2013 and to be placed on the Retired List on 
1 October 2013.

41.  HRC requested a grade determination from the DASA (RB) to determine the highest grade in which she had served satisfactorily for retirement purposes.

42.  On 23 April 2013, ARBA notified her that her Army Military Human Resource Record, which included her NJP of 21 February 2008 and a relief for cause OER, and ORB would be forwarded to the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB).  The AGDRB would recommend the highest grade in which she had served satisfactorily for retirement purposes to the DASA (RB), who would make a final determination.  She could not appear before the AGDRB but she could submit any written materials she want the AGDRB to consider.  On 29 April 2013, she elected to submit written material.  
43.  On 29 April 2013, she requested favorable consideration at the AGDRB allowing her to retire in the grade of CPT.

	a.  She received NJP and a relief for cause OER for having engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a senior NCO.  At the time, she was lonely and depressed due to a recent divorce.  The relationship negatively impacted her professional and personal life and she admitted to the inappropriate relationship to the battalion commander.  She regrets her actions.  Her actions were inexcusable and she has accepted full responsibility for her poor judgement.

	b.  Since the incident she worked hard to prove herself to the Army.  Her performance had always been exceptional, and it improved greatly following the incident.  The actions taken against her by the Army served its purpose.  She learned from her mistake and moved on, as evidenced by her continued excellence on her last six OERs.

	c.  On 3 June 2010, she was identified to show cause for retention due to the referred OER.  On 27 July 2011, she appeared before a FBOI to show cause for retention.  The FBOI recommended that she be retained in the Army and therefore the elimination action was closed.  She believed if she was not performing well the board would have not recommended retention.

	d.  After the incident she successfully completed the MPCCC and Antiterrorism Couse.  She completed a 1-year tour in Kuwait as the MP Operations Officer and she was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal.

	e.  Her most significant achievement was successfully commanding a Warrior Transition Company for 2 years where she was rated the top commander in the battalion and she was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal.

44.  On 20 May 2013, the DASA (RB) notified HRC the AGDRB reviewed the applicant's voluntary retirement and request for a grade determination.  If the retirement was approved, the DASA (RB) directed she be placed on the Retired List in the grade of O-2 (first lieutenant).

45.  On 21 May 2013, she was awarded the Master Parachutist Badge.

46.  On 29 May 2013, she was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for her service from 1 October 2003 - 30 September 2013 for over 20 years of exceptionally meritorious service culminating as the Provost Marshal Operations Officer for the XVIII Airborne Corps.

47.  On 3 June 2013, she received an OER for the period 25 April 2012 - 24 April 2013.  She was assigned as the Operations Officer for the Provost Marshal Office of the only airborne Corps Headquarters in the Army.  Her rater was the Deputy Provost Marshal and her senior rater was the Corps Provost Marshal. 

	a.  In Parts IVa and IVb all blocks are checked "YES."

	b.  Her rater evaluated her in Part Va as "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote."  In Part Vc her rater stated she had unlimited potential for promotion.  

	c.  Her senior rater evaluated her in Part VIIa as "Best Qualified."  In Part VIIc her senior rater stated:

Tremendous performance by an experienced officer.  [The applicant] has excelled in every mission.  She has been the continuity for the Provost Marshal Office over the past year and has been instrumental in the coordination and synchronization of planning efforts for the military police responsibilities in several SOPs, Joint exercises, and contingency operation preparations.  Her knowledge and proficiency in personnel management, leadership, and logistical operations have contributed to the successful daily operations within the Provost Marshal Office.  [The applicant's] interpersonal skills have enabled others to excel, contribute to the overall organizational success, and form a productive and cohesive team.  [The applicant] has the potential to excel in positions of increased responsibility and will have a significant impact on the success of any organization that she is assigned.

48.  On 30 September 2013, she was retired by reason of non-selection, permanent promotion.  She completed 20 years and 10 days of active service.

	a.  Item 18 (Remarks) of her DD Form 214 contains the entry "RETIRED LIST GRADE 1LT."

	b.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Bragg, Orders 142-0286, dated 22 May 2013, retired her effective 30 September 2013 and placed her on the Retired List in the grade of 1LT.  The orders indicated she had not completed over 4 years of enlisted service.

49.  Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Bragg Orders 329-2089, dated 25 November 2013, amended the above orders to show she did complete over 4 years of enlisted service. 

50.  Army Regulation 15-80 governs the actions and composition of the AGDRB and establishes policies, procedures, and responsibilities of the AGDRB and other organizations delegated authority to make grade determinations on behalf of the Secretary of the Army (SA).

	a.  Paragraph 1-5 states: 

		(1)  The SA retains the prerogative to accomplish grade determination without referral to the AGDRB.  

		(2)  The DASA (RB) will make discretionary grade determinations for the SA for officers below the grade of brigadier general involving service retirement, physical disability retirement, computation of retired pay, or separation for physical disability.  The DASA (RB) 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.

		(3)  The Senior Legal Advisor, ARBA will:

	(a)  Monitor the Army grade determination review process.

	(b)  Compile and organize evidence for review by the AGDRB.

	(c)  Serve as recorder for the AGDRB involving general officers.

	(d)  Report AGDRB recommendations to the appropriate official for final determination.

	(e)  Provide legal advice to the AGDRB.

	b.	Paragraph 2-2 states the AGDRB considers individual cases that are referred to it in accordance with this regulation.  It directs or recommends the final grade determination that affects an individual’s separation or retired pay. The AGDRB decides cases on the evidence of record.  It is not an investigative body.  AGDRB discussions and individual votes of members are privileged and confidential and will be disclosed only to those individuals in the decision-making process with a need to know.

	c.  Paragraph 2-4 states a grade determination is an administrative decision to determine appropriate retirement grade, retirement pay, or other separation pay.  Although a lower grade determination may affect an individual adversely, it is not punitive.  The AGDRB will consider each case on its own merits.  Generally, determination will be based on the Soldier’s overall service in the grade in question (emphasis added), either on active duty or other service qualifying the Soldier for service/physical disability retirement, receipt of retired pay, or separation for physical disability.  Circumstances pertinent to whether such service is found satisfactory include, but are not limited to:

		(1)  Performance level, as reflected in evaluation reports and other portions of the service record that reflect performance.  In reviewing these matters, the AGDRB will consider whether reporting officials were aware of the misconduct or performance giving rise to the grade determination.

		(2)  Nature and severity of misconduct, if any.  Although the punishment an individual has received may be one factor in determining the seriousness of misconduct, the amount of punishment will not be considered in determining whether “the individual has been punished enough.”  Grade determinations are not considered punitive, and the standard for grade determinations is “highest grade satisfactorily served,” not whether the individual has been sufficiently punished.

		(3)  The grade at which the misconduct was committed.

	c.  Paragraph 2-5 of Army Regulation 15-80 covers “unsatisfactory service” and states that service in a grade will be considered to have been unsatisfactory when:  

		(1)  The highest grade or rank was a result of a terminal leave promotion; 

		(2)  Reversion to a lower grade was expressly for prejudice or cause, due to misconduct, caused by nonjudicial punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform code of Military Justice (UCMJ) or the result of the sentence of a court-martial;  

		(3)  There is sufficient unfavorable information to establish that the Soldier’s service in the grade in question was not satisfactory.  One specific act of misconduct may form the basis for a determination that the overall service in that grade was not satisfactory, regardless of the period of time served in grade.  However, service retirement in lieu of or as a result of elimination action will not, by itself, preclude retirement in the highest grade (emphasis added).

51.  Army Regulation 600-8-24 provides principles of support, standards of service, policies, tasks, rules, and steps governing all work required to support officer transfers and discharges.

	a.  Paragraph 4-2b states elimination action may be or will be initiated for misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or in the interests of national security.  This includes conduct unbecoming an officer and failure to obey an order.

	b.  Paragraph 4-24 states any officer identified for elimination may, at any time during or prior to the final action in the elimination case, apply for retirement in lieu of elimination if otherwise eligible.  Any officer who has been the subject of any substantiated adverse finding or conclusion from an officially documented investigation, proceeding or inquiry (except minor traffic infractions) since the officer’s last promotion, will have the case forwarded to the AGDRB to determine the highest grade the officer satisfactorily held while on active duty, provided that such information is reflected, or should be reflected by regulation, in the officer’s OMPF.  Final retirement grade determination is made by DASA (RB) or Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) (ASA M&RA), as appropriate.

	c.  Paragraph 6-16d states an officer who receives a notification memorandum of impending elimination may request retirement in lieu of elimination, if the officer has 19 years and 6 months or more active federal service on the date of such application.  If the officer elects to retire and the elimination action involved misconduct or moral or professional dereliction, Commanding General, HRC, will forward the retirement application and memorandum of notification for elimination with all supporting documentation to the AGDRB.  Any comment or rebuttal by the officer and the officer’s OMPF will be included in the forwarding documentation.  The AGDRB will make recommendation as to the highest grade that the officer has served on active duty satisfactorily.

52.  Title 10, United States Code, Section 1370 governs the retired grade of commissioned officers.  Section 1370 (a) states the rule for retirement in the highest grade held satisfactorily.  This provision of law essentially states that, unless entitled to a higher grade by some other provision of law, a commissioned officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force or Marine Corps who retires under any provision of law other than chapter 61 (Retirement or Separation for Physical Disability) or chapter 1223 (Retired Pay for Non-Regular Service) of Title 10 shall be retired in the highest grade in which he served on active duty satisfactorily, as determined by the Secretary of the Military Department concerned, for not less than 6 months. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The AGDRB discussions in their determination of the applicant's highest grade satisfactorily held were not available for the Board to review.

2.  On 21 February 2008, she accepted NJP and received a GOMOR on 
28 February 2008 for violating Article 92 of the UCMJ by engaging in a wrongful inappropriate personal relationship with the Battalion CSM and she engaged in a sexual relationship over a 5-month period.  On 10 March 2008, she received a relief for cause OER for the period 16 December 2006 - 5 March 2008.

3.  In the relief for cause OER the rater stated the inappropriate relationship was accompanied by numerous lies and cover-ups.  However, the findings of the 
AR 15-6 investigation do not support this statement.  There was no mention in the AR 15-6 investigation of either the applicant or the CSM being involved in lies about or cover-ups of their relationship.  The IO found rumors to be wide-spread within HHD of an inappropriate relationship, however he found no evidence that any other had any direct, first-hand knowledge of a relationship that could be clearly defined as inappropriate.

4.  The AR 15-6 investigation specifically stated no evidence was found that the personal relationship between the applicant and the CSM had either adversely or favorably affected the assignment, promotion, or otherwise professional development of any Soldier currently assigned or previously assigned to the 503rd MP Battalion.

5.  In all OERs she received since the incident she has been rated "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote" by her raters and "Best Qualified" by her senior raters.  Her senior raters included such comments as:

* "A solid performance by a high performing officer."
* "Superb performance.  (The applicant) is one of the top captains in the Directorate and the top 5% of the captains I've served with in over 
25 years"
* "Promote to major ahead of her peers."
* ".. is clearly the best captain in the division.  Moreover, she is in the top 2% of all captains I've served with in my 21 years of military service"
* "Outstanding performance by one of our most proficient leaders.  (The applicant) ranks in the top 10% of all company grade officers with whom I have served in 26 years of service"
* "Absolutely outstanding performance by the best company commander in the Warrior Transition Battalion and top company commander under my command."
* "Tremendous performance by an experienced officer."

6.  She was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for her service from 
29 January 2009 - 8 January 2010 as the G36, Protection Provost Marshal Operations Officer in Kuwait.
7.  On 27 July 2011, an FBOI convened due to her being identified to show cause for retention and found that she had learned from her lapse in judgment and had the potential to be an outstanding officer and an asset to the Army.  The FBOI recommended she be retained in the U.S. Army.

8.  She was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for her service from 
25 March 2010 - 26 April 2012 as the company commander, Company B, WTB.

9.  She was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for her service from 
1 October 2003 - 30 September 2013 for over 20 years of exceptionally meritorious service culminating as the Provost Marshal Operations Officer for the XVIII Airborne Corps.

10.  The applicant clearly had learned from her previous act of indiscretion.  She had accepted responsibility for her mistake and accepted the consequences.  Subsequently, she moved on with her career receiving outstanding OERs and was awarded two Meritorious Service Medals for her performance.  She was awarded a third Meritorious Service Medal for her overall service.  

11.  The actions taken by the Army due to her misconduct clearly had served their purpose.  She went on to serve over 5 years as a captain in a variety of challenging positions and she was assigned as a company commander in a WTB.

12.  The FBOI acknowledged her previous misconduct and found she had learned from her lapse in judgement.  The FBOI stated she had the potential to be an outstanding officer and an asset to the Army.  Her continued outstanding performance shows she lived up to the expectations expressed by the FBOI.

13.  It would be equitable to correct her records to show the highest grade she satisfactorily held was CPT and that she was placed on the Retired List in the grade of CPT/pay grade O3E.


BOARD VOTE:

____X____  ___X_____  ____X____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was 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:

	a.  Deleting the entry "RETIRED LIST GRADE 1LT" in item 18 of her 
DD Form 214.

	b.  Amending U.S. Army Installation Management Command, Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Bragg Orders 142-0286, dated 22 May 2013, by changing them to read "Retired grade/Date of rank:  CPT/1 August 2006.

	c.  Paying her any monies due as a result of the above corrections. 




      _______ _   _X______   ___
       	   CHAIRPERSON
      
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.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140020641





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140020641



21


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1