IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	20 June 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130015637
___________________________________________________________________________

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 that his narrative reason for separation be changed.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he is making this request so that he can become eligible to both restart his military service and obtain employment with the government.  His discharge was based on an isolated incident out of almost fifty-four months of service.  The fact that both the traffic and the criminal courts dismissed the DUI charges that prompt the GOMOR and eventually discharging him from the service.  He had a record of outstanding service and evaluations and hopes the board will decide in his favor and allow him to begin serving once again.  

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			23 August 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Honorable
c. Date of Discharge:				6 March 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:		Unacceptable Conduct, AR 600—8-24,
Paragraph 4-2b
e. Unit of assignment:				A Company, 304th Military Intelligence
Battalion, US Army Intelligence Center of
Excellence, Fort Huachuca, AZ
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		9 June 2007, Indefinite
g. Current Enlistment Service:		4 years, 8 months, 28 days
h. Total Service:				6 years, 6 months, 20 days
i. Time Lost:					None
j. Previous Discharges:			USAR 050817-070608/NA
(Concurrent Service)
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			CPT/O-3 
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		35D, All Source Intelligence Officer
m. GT Score:					NA
n. Education:					College Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				Southwest Asia
p. Combat Service:				Iraq, dates-NIF
q. Decorations/Awards:			BSM, ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS,
ASR, OSR, MUC
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		No
s. Performance Ratings:			Yes
t. Counseling Statements:			None
u. Prior Board Review:				No


SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Army Reserve on 17 August 2005, for 8 years.  He was appointed for an indefinite term in the Regular Army on 9 June 2007.  He was 23 years old at the time of entry and had a BA Degree.  He served in Iraq, and earned a BSM, and an ARCOM.  He completed 4 years, 8 months, and 28 days of active duty service for the period of service under review and had a total of 6 years, 6 months, and 20 days of active and inactive military service. 

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record shows that on 17 November 2011, the applicant was notified of initiation of elimination proceedings under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, Chapter 4, paragraph 4-2b, due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction.  He was advised of his rights.  

2.  The applicant was directed to show cause for retention in the Army based on the following offenses:  apprehended  by a Sierra Vista Police Officer for driving an automobile while under the influence of alcohol and subsequently, he was advised of the Arizona implied consent law.  He consented to a breathalyzer test which registered a .160 percent blood alcohol content. An additional breathalyzer test registered .160 percent blood alcohol content.  Subsequently, he was issued a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand on (111005).  

3.  Based on the above offenses, the Commanding General (CG), US Army Intelligence Center of Excellence, Fort Huachuca, AZ, indicated he was recommending the applicant’s discharge from the Army with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

4.  On 14 October 2011, the applicant submitted a rebuttal memorandum explaining the remorsefulness he feels and requested that the chain of command consider his potential for further military service when determining the disposition of the General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand and his future.  

5.  On 22 November 2011, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the officer elimination initiation memorandum and elected to submit a statement on his own behalf.  

6.  The company, battalion, and brigade commanders recommended approval of the applicant’s elimination from the US Army with an honorable characterization of service.

7.  On 11 January 2012, the CG, US Army Intelligence Center of Excellence, Fort Huachuca, AZ, considered the applicant’s rebuttal matters, the recommendation of the chain of command, as well as the advice of the Staff Judge Advocate and recommended the applicant’s separation from the US Army, with a characterization of service of honorable.

8.  The Department of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board reviewed the Probationary Officer Elimination Case tendered by the applicant based on misconduct and moral or professional dereliction.

9.  On 17 February 2012, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board and directed the applicant’s discharge with an honorable characterization of service.   

10.  The applicant was discharged from the Army on 6 March 2012, with a characterization of service of honorable, under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, paragraph 4-2b, for unacceptable conduct.

11.  The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand dated 5 October 2011, for driving while under the influence of alcohol.

2.  A Military Police Report dated 9 September 2011, that indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for driving while under the influence of alcohol/drugs/toxic vapor or combo. 

3.  A Sierra Vista Police Department Report dated 21 September 2011, for driving under the influence of alcohol with allied documents. 

4.  Three OER’s covering the period of 18 July 2008 to 15 April 2011.  The applicant was rated as best qualified from the senior rater.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided DD Form 293, dated 19 August 2013, copy of motion to dismiss and order from the Justice Court of Arizona, dated 18 January 2012, character reference letters with various dates, and copies of his OER’s, Findings of Fact/Order document from the Administrative Law Judge, Sierra Vista, AZ, dated 15 December 2011.  

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant did not provide any with the application.  

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.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for a change to the narrative reason for his separation was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, the documents and the issue submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit a change to the applicant’s narrative reason for separation.  

2.  The record confirms 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.  By his repeated incidents of unacceptable conduct, the applicant was appropriately assigned the narrative reason for his separation in accordance with Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) which provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Officers 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 Officers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24, for Unacceptable Conduct.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  

3.  The applicant provided no corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the unacceptable conduct.  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 contends he is making this request so that he can become eligible to obtain employment with the government and that his discharge was based on an isolated incident out of almost fifty-four months of service.  The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  Further, although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Officers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The applicant's incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  

5.  The applicant further contends that he wants to restart his military service.  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact a local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist.  Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate.   

6.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

7.  Therefore, the narrative reason for discharge being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review      Date:  20 June 2014        Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel:  None

Witnesses/Observers:  No

Board Vote:
Character Change:  NA	No Change:  NA
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:	NA
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)		AR20130015637



Page 6 of 6 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1