ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 June 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170008767 APPLICANT REQUESTS: 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) * DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) 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 absent due to his grandfather passing and thinks that he should have been able to go home on leave. After the funeral, he returned to duty. He believes it was unfair on the part of the military to deny his leave. 3. A review of the applicant’s service record shows: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 October 1969. b. He was convicted by special court-martial of three specifications of being absent without leave (AWOL) from: * 15 September 1970 to 1 October 1970 * 15 June 1970 to 11 August 1970 * 30 April 1970 to 8 June 1970 c. Court-martial charges were preferred on the applicant on 7 August 1973. His DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) indicates he was charged with one specification of being AWOL from 8 January 1971 to 2 August 1973. a. d. The complete facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge are unavailable for the Board to review. However, his record contains a DD Form 214, which outlines his reason for separation. e. He was discharged from active duty on 9 October 1973. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 8 months and 16 days of service with 1,289 days lost. It also shows he was awarded or authorized: * National Defense Service Medal * Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16) * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Hand Grenade Bar 4. By regulation, an individual who has committed an offense or offenses, the punishment for which, includes a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge, may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service. 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. 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 service completed prior to multiple lengthy AWOL offenses, as well as a lack of 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. 6/19/2019 X CHAIRPERSON Signed by: 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, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 1-13a (Honorable Discharge) states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. Issuance of an Honorable Discharge Certificate is predicated upon proper military behavior and proficient performance of duty during the member’s current enlistment or period of obligated service with due consideration for the member’s age, length of service, grade, and general aptitude. b. Paragraph 1-13b (General Discharge) states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. It is issued to a member whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 10 of that regulation states an individual who has committed an offense or offenses, the punishment for which, includes a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge, may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service. 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 regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence and BCMRs may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial forum. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in discharge, which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds. The 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 on the basis of equity, an injustice, or clemency grounds, BCMRs shall consider the twelve stated principles in the guidance as well as eighteen individual factors related to an applicant. These factors include the severity of the misconduct and the length of time since the misconduct.