ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  28 August 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170008008


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his 
under other than honorable conditions discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 
DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record).

FACTS:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the 
previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of 
Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20040011429 on 21 July 2005.

2.  The applicant states his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of 
Transfer or Discharge) shows a less than honorable discharge and he believes it should 
be honorable.  He was told to take the discharge and it would be updated within a year 
to honorable.  Being young he agreed and it has not been updated in over 45 years.  He 
was told it would upgrade automatically and it never did.  

3.  A review of the applicant’s service record shows:

a.	He enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 August 1968.

b.	He received nonjudicial punishment on/for:

*	27 November 1968, failure to be at his appointed place of duty
*	13 January 1969, being absent without leave (AWOL) from 6 January 1969 to 
7 January 1969

   c.  On 17 January 1969, he was convicted by a summary court-martial for one 
specification of wrongfully and without authority wearing corporal grade insignia and one 
specification of failure to obey a lawful order by taking an unauthorized pass.  His 
sentence included forfeiture of $75.00 for one month.
   
   d.  Summary Court-Martial Order Number 2, dated 20 February 1969, ordered the 
findings of guilty of Charge II and its specification and so much of the sentence as is in 
excess of forfeiture of $40.00 for one month, in the summary court-martial case of the 
applicant adjudged on 17 February 1969, set aside.

   e.  He served in Korea from 7 February 1969 to 4 May 1970.

	f.  On 30 July 1969, he received nonjudicial punishment for one specification of 
being AWOL from 26 July 1969 to 27 July 1969 and one specification of failure to obey 
a lawful order from a superior commissioned officer.  

   g.  On 20 August 1969, he was convicted by a summary court-martial for one 
specification of AWOL from 11 August 1969 to 15 August 1969 and one specification of 
wrongfully having in his possession a false pass with the intent to deceive.  His 
sentence included restriction to the limits of the company for 60 days, reduction to the 
grade of private/E-1, and forfeiture of $50.00 for one month.
   
   h.  On 29 August 1969, he was convicted by a summary court-martial for one 
specification of being AWOL on 21 August 1969 and one specification of treating with 
contempt two superior noncommissioned officers by saying to them he would cut their 
throats.  His sentence included forfeiture of $80.00 for one month and confinement for 
30 days.
   
   i.  An unsigned copy of the commander’s letter, dated 18 December 1969, notified 
the applicant of his intent to discharge him.  The record was void of any further 
documentation regarding separation proceedings for the applicant.
   
   j.  On 1 January 1970, he was discharged from active duty under the provisions of 
AR 635-212 with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service.  
His DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 year, 2 months, and 25 days of active service 
with 37 days of lost time.  It also shows he was awarded or authorized:
   
*	National Defense Service Medal
*	Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal
*	Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar

4.  There is no evidence the applicant has applied to the Army Discharge Review Board 
for review of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. 

5.  By regulation, action will be taken to separate an individual for unfitness when it is 
clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him as a satisfactory 
Soldier, further effort is unlikely to succeed.  An individual separated by reason of 
unfitness will be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

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 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 short term of 
honorable service completed prior to a pattern of misconduct, as well as a lack of post-
service character evidence submitted by the applicant to show that he has learned and 
grown from the events leading to his separation, the Board concluded that the 
characterization of service received at the time of discharge was appropriate.

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.  Army Regulation (AR) 635-212 (Personnel Separations – Discharge – Unfitness and 
Unsuitability), in effect at the time, set forth the policy for administrative separations for 
unfitness.  

	a.  Paragraph 3 (Policy) states action will be taken to separate an individual for 
unfitness when it is clearly established that:

*	despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him as a satisfactory Soldier, 
further effort is unlikely to succeed
*	rehabilitation is impracticable (as in cases of confirmed drug addiction) or he 
is not amenable to rehabilitation measures (as indicated by the medical 
and/or personal history record)
*	an unfitting medical condition is not the direct or substantial contributing 
cause of his unfitness

	b.  Paragraph 4 (Types of Separation) states an individual separated by reason of 
unfitness will be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate except that an 
honorable or general discharge certificate may be awarded if the individual being 
discharged has been awarded a personal decoration or if warranted by the particular 
circumstances in a given case.

2.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Separations), currently in effect, sets 
forth the basic policy for separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a (Honorable Discharge) states an honorable discharge is a 
separation with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality 
of the Soldier’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 (General Discharge) 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.

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)	 AR20170008008

4

1