ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 June 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: 20170010205 APPLICANT REQUESTS: a change to his narrative reason for separation. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 293 (Application for Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) * DD 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Self-authored letter previously submitted with the separation packet * Letter of support from his spouse * Letter of support from his First Sergeant * Letter of support from his senior noncommissioned officer 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 would like to reenlist to finish his career as a Soldier in the Army. He made one bad decision that cost him his career; however, he was a stellar Soldier who excelled at everything, and had no additional issues. His judgement was clouded at the time, and he was also experiencing marital problems. His senior noncommissioned officers, officers, and warrant officers wrote letters of support to retain him in the Army. 3. The applicant provides: a. Self-authored Letter, stating he sincerely apologizes for his moral acts of misconduct he displayed as a noncommissioned officer (NCO) and a Soldier. He expressed his regret for his action in a moment of weakness and acknowledged how his actions negatively affected others, as well as, his effectiveness as an NCO and Soldier. He further states that prior to his misconduct, he always lived by the seven Army Values, displayed the utmost attitude in leadership and professionalism, accomplished a a. lot in a short period of time, and considered himself a true professional. In closing, he states that his spouse who has been his rock, has forgiven him and has given him a chance to prove that he is the man she chose to marry and a trustworthy husband, who truly made a mistake. b. Letter of support from his spouse, expressing her disappointment after finding out what her husband had done. A decision that she found to be selfish, stupid, hurtful, and made using bad judgement; however, she understands people make mistakes. She has chosen to find it in her heart to forgive him and move forward with her marriage. Her husband is not perfect, but his is a great father. She further states, her husband has taken his punishment and accepted the consequences of this action. She believes that his one mistake should not end his career and the Army is their means of supporting their family. c. Letter of support from his First Sergeant, stating the applicant had no prior misconduct and the applicant still possess the potential for a promising career in the military. d. Letter of support from his senior noncommissioned officer, stating he has known the applicant for two years and despite his misconduct, he has always been and still is an outstanding leader. In addition, the applicant has learned from the results of his actions and can still recover. 4. The applicant: * enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 October 2003, according to his DD Form 214 * accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 7 July 2011 for violating Articles 107, 92 (twice), and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice * was notified of initiation of separation proceedings on 27 December 2011 * received legal counsel and requested a personal appearance before an administrative separation board on 29 December 2011 5. On 23 January 2012, an Administrative Separation Board convened and based on a preponderance of the evidence set forth, it was recommended that the applicant be separated from the service due to misconduct and should receive an honorable discharge. 6. The separation authority approved the administrative board’s findings and recommendations on 4 February 2012, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12(c), and directed that he be discharged with a characterization of service as honorable. 7. The applicant was discharged on 19 April 2012. 1. 8. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. 9. The Board should consider the applicant's submissions in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined that relief was warranted. Based upon the type of misconduct which led to the applicant’s separation, as well as the character evidence submitted by the applicant to show he has learned and grown from those events, the Board concluded that granting clemency by changing the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority was appropriate. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 XX XX XX GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by reissuing the applicant a DD Form 214 showing his narrative reason for separation as Secretarial Authority. 6/19/2019 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. AR 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 2-2c (3) states the commander will advise the Soldier of his right to a hearing before an administrative separation board under section III if he had 6 or more years of total active and reserve service on the date of initiation of recommendation for separation. b. Paragraph 2-6a (1)(a) states when the board has recommended separation for misconduct, the separation authority may direct separation of the Soldier for misconduct, except for Soldiers referred to in paragraph 1-19f. c. Paragraph 3-7a provides that 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.