ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 May 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160017628 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * an upgrade of his general discharge * a change to the narrative reason for separation. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Self-authored statement FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states, via his self-authored statement, in effect: a. He was going through several hardships and losses, some which included his separation from his wife and the loss of a very close family member. He was not being mindful on how to position himself and adjust to the events that were taking place, he failed to reach out to his chain of command for proper help. Instead, he was introduced to a substance that he regrets to this day. He is happy to say that since 2009 and taking such a loss with the Army, he has overcome turning to substance abuse to solve his problems. b. Becoming a Solider was the best thing to ever happen to him. His request is based on his character as a Soldier and the importance he had to his assigned unit at the time of parting. He never received any disciplinary actions, striving to be the model Soldier he was trained to be. If ever given the opportunity to serve his country, he would do it in a heartbeat. He has grown into the best man he can possible be - mentally, physically, and spiritually. c. He has encountered difficulties establishing a career path where he can provide comfortably for his family. Once potential employers evaluate his military background, the job is not granted. He takes full responsibility for his past actions. 3. A review of the applicant's service record shows: a. He entered active duty on 13 November 2007. b. The complete facts and circumstances surrounding his separation are not available for review. c. His DD Form 214 reflects he was discharged on 7 October 2009, under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 14-12c, misconduct (serious offense), with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions. He completed 2 years, 3 months, and 1 day of active service. The DD Form 214 also shows in: * Item 23 (Type of Separation) - Discharge * Item 26 (Separation Code) – JKQ * Item 27 (Reentry Code) - 3 * Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) - Misconduct (Serious Offense) 4. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 12 January 2011. The ADRB determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. 5. By regulation (AR 635-200), action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct such as commission of a serious offense. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. 6. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and his service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to grant relief. The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. The Board applied Department of Defense standards of liberal consideration to the complete evidentiary record and did not find any evidence of error, injustice, or inequity. He did not provide character witness statements or evidence of post-service achievements for the Board to consider. Based upon the record, the Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization was warranted as a result of the misconduct. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING X X X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 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. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. b. Paragraph 3-7b states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 14, of the version in effect at the time, established policy and prescribed procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories included minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities. It provided that action would be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impracticable or was unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority could direct an honorable discharge if merited by the Soldier's overall record. 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 type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief based on 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. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160017628 4 1