ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 June 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170012091 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) * Self-Authored Statement * DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) * Army Board For Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Docket Number AC85-00477 * Three Letters of Support FACTS: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AC85-00477 on 28 May 1986. 2. The applicant states he hopes the Board will consider his letters of support and upgrade him to at least a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was told that he could request a discharge, but he did not even think about it. He is 68 years old now and has never been in trouble with the law. He has done a lot less than those that President Ford gave amnesty to for upgrade in 1974. He believes that 48 years is long enough. 3. The applicant provides: a. A letter of support from R.S., which states that she is the applicant’s wife and has been married to him for over 40 years. She states her daughter’s dad was still in the picture and did not want her adopted. She considered the applicant to be her daughter’s father in every way except by name. She states that when they met the applicant had told her about his discharge she encouraged him to get his high school diploma and he received it. The applicant was supposed to graduate in 1967. She states that he was taking off and she gave him a choice and he picked her and the kids. She states that she is 69 and the applicant is 68 and he really needs to have his discharge upgraded. b. A letter of support from X___, which states that he is writing on behalf of his brother. He thinks that his brother deserves a change in his DD Form 214 to honorable conditions. He states under today’s standards the applicant would not have been able to enlist in the Armed Forces. He was only 17 years old and has not finished high school according to X___. In his opinion the applicant does not deserve to be punished any longer with the stigma of this discharge. c. A letter of support from X___that states that she wrote a letter for the first time that he tried to get his discharge and he lived with her and her family for 2 years prior to joining the Army. The applicant was bounced back and forth from parent to parent and he adopted his wife’s son from a previous marriage. She asks the Board to please let her brother have his discharge upgraded. d. A letter of support from X___ which states that he wrote a letter previously and testified for the applicant for his hearing. He states that the applicant deserves to have his discharge upgraded to at least a general discharge. He is retired from the military with 25 years of service and he is a decorated Vietnam War Era Veteran. He thanks the Board. 5. A review of the applicant’s record shows: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 April 1967. b. He accepted nonjudicial punishment on/for: * 11 August 1967, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 3 August 1967 to 11 August 1967 * 21 August 1968, for being AWOL from 4 June 1968 to 7 August 1968 c. He was convicted by special court-martial of two specifications of being AWOL from 14 September 1968 to 5 November 1968 and from 25 November 1968 to 20 January 1969. The court sentenced him to forfeiture of $46 pay per month for 6 months and confinement at hard labor for 4 months. d. Court-martial charges were preferred on the applicant on 4 December 1969. His DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) indicates he was charged with two specifications of being AWOL from 1 August 1969 to 15 August 1969 and from 18 August 1969 to 6 October 1969. e. On 19 November 1969, after consulting with legal counsel he requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. He acknowledged: * maximum punishment * if his request for discharge was accepted, he may be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate * he may be deprived of many or all Army benefits * he may be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law * he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life f. Consistent with the chain of command recommendations, the separation approval authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge for the good of the service on 15 December 1969. He would be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate and reduced to the lowest enlisted pay grade. g. He was discharged from active duty on 31 December 1969 with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 year, 8 months, and 7 days of active service with 366 days lost time. It also shows he was awarded or authorized: * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14) * Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14) 5. 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. An Undesirable Discharge Certificate will normally be furnished an individual who is discharged for the good of the service. 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 review of the application and all evidence, to include the DoD guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to grant relief. Based upon the relatively short term of honorable service completed when compared to the number of AWOL offenses and time spent in an AWOL status, 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. 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 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 1-9d (Honorable Discharge) states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. Issuance of an honorable discharge will be conditioned upon proper military behavior and proficient performance of duty during the member’s current enlistment of current period of service with due consideration for the member’s age, length of service, grade, and general aptitude. b. Paragraph 1-9e (General Discharge) states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions of an individual whose military record is not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 10 of this 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. An Undesirable Discharge Certificate will normally be furnished an individual who is discharged 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170012091 5 1