ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  17 May 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170002160


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

* DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
* Orders C-10-522192, dated 3 October 2005
* Orders 06-041-00038, dated 10 February 2006
* Orders 06-180-00013, dated 29 June 2006
* Orders 06-192-0001, dated 11 July 2006

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 she am requesting that my discharge be upgraded to Honorable, which she was given on her ETS.  However, at the time of her ETS she was home visiting family and her husband was still serving in Germany.  Her intent was to stay home in Pennsylvania, but she decided to re-enlist and she returned to Germany.
She never consented to the Norristown unit, but would have considered it if she was to remain in Pennsylvania.  She returned to Germany and never heard anything more about her Reserve status, so she thought she was in the USAR Control group, RCPAC St Louis.

     b.  On 18 November, she received an incomplete record from St Louis, which showed her as a member of the Norristown unit. She never was at the unit
nor did she receive any information in regards to this matter.  She did not received a DD Form 214 to date and was told no record exists.  This is an error which should be corrected and restored to an Honorable Character of Service.  

3.  The applicant provides:
   a. U.S. Army Human Resources Command Orders C-10-522192 dated, 3 October 2005 which shows she was reassigned in the Reserve and assigned to the 358 Civil Affairs Brigade, Norristown, PA with an effective date of 30 September 2005.
   
   b. Headquarters, U.S. Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command (USACAPOC) Orders 06-041-00038 dated, 10 February 2006 which shows she was involuntarily reassigned, for the convenience of the government to USACAPOC (A) Fort Bragg, NC with an effective date of 10 February 2006.
   
   c. Headquarters, USACAPOC Orders 06-180-00013 dated, 29 June 2006 which shows she was discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions with an effective date of 29 June 2006.
   
   d. Headquarters, USACAPAC Orders 06-192-0001 dated, 11 July 2006, which shows she was reduced from specialist/E-4 to private/E-1 with a date of rank of 29 June 2006.

4.  The complete facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge from the U.S. Army Reserve on 29 June 2006 is not available for review with this case.  However, there are sufficient remaining documents that show she entered active service on 26 February 2002 for a period of 3 years.  She was discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve on 29 June 2006 with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  

5.  The Board should consider the applicant's submissions in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After review of the application and all evidence, to include the DoD guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the Board determined that relief was not warranted.  Based upon the documentary evidence presented by the applicant and found within her military service record, the Board concluded there is insufficient evidence to show that there was an error or injustice which would warrant changing the characterization of service on the applicant’s administrative separation.  For that reason, the Board recommended denying the applicant’s request for relief.


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 140-10 (Assignments, Attachments, Details, and Transfers) sets forth the basic authority for the assignment, attachment, detail, and transfer of USAR Soldiers.  Chapter 2-7 pertains to the voluntary and involuntary reassignment between troop program units.  The reassignment (voluntary or involuntary) of a TPU Soldier to another TPU may be accomplished by the authorities citied in paragraph 1-5.  

3.  Army Regulation 135-178 provides for the separation of enlisted personnel of the U.S. Army Reserve and Army National Guard.  It states the honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service generally meets the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for military personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  A general discharge is warranted when significant negative aspects of the Soldier's conduct or performance outweigh positive aspects of the Soldier's military record.  

4.  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)	 AR20170002160


3


1