ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 18 September 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170011293 APPLICANT REQUESTS: an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) * Army Review Boards Agency letter 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 the reason given to him for his discharge was there was not any more openings for his next rank promotion. He feels he was discharged at the time due to his race. He did not want to get out of the military and he told that he had no choice due to the rank shortage. 3. Review of the applicant’s service record shows: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 November 1966, for 3 years. He was honorably released from active duty on 11 October 1969 and was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserves (USAR) Control Group. His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows he completed 2 years, 10 months, and 20 days of active service. b. He was honorably discharged from the USAR on 21 November 1972. He reenlisted in the USAR on 28 January 1976. He was honorably discharged from the USAR on 13 September 1979. c. He enlisted in the Florida Army National Guard (FLARNG) on 14 September 1979. d. The complete facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge from the FLARNG are not available for the Board to review. However, his available record contains the following: (1) A Separation Under Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve – Separation of Enlisted Personnel) memorandum, dated 18 April 1980, wherein the applicant’s company commander initiated action to separate the applicant from the FLARNG, under the provisions of AR 135-178, chapter 7, with a general discharge. The company commander stated the reason for the proposed action was the applicant being absent for three scheduled drills, having indicated that he did not wish to attend anymore, and having not attempted to rectify the situation. He advised the applicant of his rights. (2) An NGB Form 22 showing he was released from the FLARNG on 13 June 1980 and was transferred to the USAR Control Group. His service was characterized as general. This form also shows he completed 8 months and 28 days of net service. e. Orders Number 12-1074767, issued by the Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center on 24 December 1981, announced his discharge from the USAR on 17 January 1982. The orders show his service was characterized as general. 4. By AR 135-178, enlisted member separated for misconduct by reason of unsatisfactory participation of statutory obligated members would be furnished, if warranted by the circumstances of the case, a characterization of general, under honorable conditions. 5. The Board should consider the applicant’s petition and his service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined relief is not warranted. The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. The Board applied Department of Defense standards of liberal consideration to the complete evidentiary record and did not find any evidence of error, injustice, or inequity. He did not provide character witness statements or evidence of post-service achievements for the Board to consider. He was discharged for not reporting for ARNG duty nor wanting to participate and was provided an Under Honorable Conditions (General) characterization of service. The Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization is warranted as he did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. 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 (AR) 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve – Separation of Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, established policies, standards, and procedures governing the administrative separation of certain enlisted Soldiers of the Army National Guard of the United States and U.S. Army Reserve. The regulation stated in: a. Paragraph 1-10b(1) – an honorable characterization of service was appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service generally had met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would clearly be inappropriate. b. Paragraph 1-10b(2) – a general discharge was a separation from the United States Army under honorable conditions of an enlisted member whose military record was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 7 – enlisted member separated for misconduct by reason of unsatisfactory participation of statutory obligated members would be furnished a characterization of service under other than honorable conditions. If warranted by the circumstances of the case, a characterization of honorable or general, under honorable conditions could be furnished. 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 form 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 the 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170011293 3 1