ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 May 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170001050 APPLICANT REQUESTS: an upgrade to his general under honorable conditions discharge 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) 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 he was hit in the eye with an antenna M60A1 and lost his depth perception. His First Sergeant asked him what he wanted to do and he informed the First Sergeant that he wanted to get out of the military. He says that he did not realize that getting a general under honorable conditions discharge would deny him the Flag or Military Burial when he passes. He feels he did nothing wrong to have received this type of discharge. He was injured and felt he could not do his job effectively. He did not have any documents, but he did have surgery at the hospital in Fort Hood when he was hit in the eye. However, he has not been able to locate those records. He is requesting that the Board locate the records from the hospital. 3. A view of the applicant’s service record shows: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 November 1974 and was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) of 11E10 (Armor Crewman). b. He received an article 15 under the provisions of Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for misconduct and was reduced from the rank of private first class (PFC/E-3) to private (E-2), effective 16 December 1975. c. On 11 February 1976, he was promoted to PFC. a. d. On 19 April 1976, his status changed from present for duty to hospital, where he was admitted. e. The applicant was released from the hospital on 28 April 1976 and it appears he was on quarters, but able to return to duty on 30 April 1976. f. The applicant's immediate commander notified him on 20 July 1976 that he was initiating action to separate him from the service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 5 (Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP)), with a General Discharge Certificate. As reasons for the proposed separation action, the applicant's commander cited one company grade Article 15 and 5 records of counselling for various deficiencies. g. On 20 July 1976, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the proposed separation notification and elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf. h. 20 July 1976, his commanding officer recommended he be discharged under the provisions of chapter 5, AR 635-200 and receive a general under honorable conditions discharge characterization. i. Consistent with the chain of command's recommendation, the separation authority approved his request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 5, and directed the issuance of a general under honorable conditions discharge. j. On 30 August, 1976, the applicant was discharged from active duty under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 5. The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 year 9 months and 26 days of active service. It also shows he was authorized or awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16). 4. By regulation, commanders with the ability to request expeditious elimination of substandard, nonproductive Soldiers before board or punitive action becomes necessary. These provisions are intended to relieve unit commanders of the administrative burden normally associated with processing eliminations for cause through administrative discharge boards by providing a means to discharge such personnel expeditiously before they progress to the point where board or punitive action becomes necessary. 5. 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. 1. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, to include the DoD guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the Board determined that relief was not warranted. Based upon the multiple violations found within the service record and the applicant receiving an Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge at the time of separation, the Board found no error or injustice which would warrant correcting the record. 2. 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. 1535874 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 (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) in effect at the time, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 1-9d (Honorable Discharge) states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. Issuance of an honorable discharge will be conditioned upon proper military behavior and proficient performance of duty during the member's current enlistment or current period of service with due consideration for the member's age, length of service, grade, and general aptitude. b. Paragraph 1-9e (General Discharge) states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions of an individual whose military record is not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. When a member's service is characterized as general, except when discharged by reason of misconduct, unfitness, or unsuitability. c. Chapter 5 of that regulation provides commanders with the ability to request expeditious elimination of substandard, nonproductive Soldiers before board or punitive action becomes necessary. These provisions are intended to relieve unit commanders of the administrative burden normally associated with processing eliminations for cause through administrative discharge boards by providing a means to discharge such personnel expeditiously before they progress to the point where board or punitive action becomes necessary. 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 1. 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.