ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  12 September 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170012428


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions 
discharge to general under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	Self-Authored Statement 
*	DA Form 2166-3, Noncommissioned Officers (NCO) Performance Evaluation 
Report
*	Letter of Appreciation, 24 September 1976

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 believe he served with honorable service.  He was drinking 
heavily during the time he was absent without leave (AWOL) and he did not understand 
the consequences associated with his decisions or actions, while he was under the 
influence.  It is more than likely he needed treatment, which was not afforded to him.  

3.  The applicant provides:

	a.  A self-authored statement, which states he is not making any excuses for leaving 
the Army, although his drinking was a big issue.  He hung around with the wrong crowd 
and got drunk one day and never returned.  When it was time for him to face his 
punishment, he was told that he would get mistreated and the stories about the 
stockade were scary enough that once you entered, it would be a punishment a person 
would not want to take.  He is not an educated person, but if he had done things 
differently, he would have just taken the punishment.  He did love the Army and even at 
his age now, if he was asked if he would join again, he would.

	b.  DA Form 2166-3, NCO Performance Evaluation Report.  The report shows non-
rated period of 7 months while assigned to Company B, 1st Infantry, Camp Harvey, 
Korea.  His description of duties included a position as a Grenadier in a rifle squad in 
support of the squad.  His was scored with 120 points.

	c.  A Letter of Appreciation, dated 24 September 1976, from the commander of 
Company B, 1st Battalion, 9th Infantry that states the eve of his departure from the 
command, the commander expressed his appreciation to him for a job well done.  As a 
squad leader the commander states he observed the applicant during his tour in Korea 
and he demonstrated his ability to excel in many areas.

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

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 April 1975. 

	b.  He served overseas in Korea from 12 October 1975 to 11 October 1976.

	c.  He was absent without leave on 6 June 1977 to 13 October 1977.

	d.  After consulting with legal counsel on 21 October 1977, he requested a discharge 
for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 
635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel).  He acknowledged:

*	maximum punishment
*	he was guilty of a charge against him or of a lesser included offense
*	he does not desire further rehabilitation or further military service
*	he was advised of his rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice
*	if his request for discharge was accepted, he may be discharged under other 
than honorable conditions, as a result of the issuance of such a discharge
*	he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, he may be ineligible for 
many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, and that 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
*	once his discharge is submitted, it may be withdrawn provided in paragraph 
10-5, AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel)
*	advised that he may submit statement on his own behalf which will 
accompany his request for discharge, statement was not submitted

	e.  DA Form 3835 (Notice of Unauthorized Absence from United States Army), show 
the applicant AWOL on 6 June 1977 and dropped from the rolls on5 July 1977.

	f.  Court-martial charges were preferred on the applicant on 13 July 1977, for one 
specification of being AWOL from 6 June 1977 to 5 July 1977.
	g.  Court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant on 20 October 1977, 
for one specification of being AWOL from 6 June 1977 to14 October 1977.

	h.  DA Form 3836 (Notice of Return of US Army Member from Unauthorized 
Absence), terminated apprehension efforts on the applicant.  He returned at Ft. Sill, OK 
on 14 October 1977.

	i.  On 28 October 1977, the initial commander recommended approval and issuance 
of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

	j.  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 3 
November 1977.  He would be issued an Under Than Honorable Conditions Certificate 
and reduced to the lowest enlisted pay grade.

	k.  He was discharged from active duty on 10 November 1977, with an under other 
than honorable conditions characterization of service.  His DD Form 214 shows he 
completed 2 years and 3 months of active service with 151 days lost time.  

5.  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. 

6.  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.

7.  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 reviewing the application and all supporting documents, to include the DoD 
guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the 
Board determined relief was not warranted.  Based upon the lack of post-service 
character evidence submitted by the applicant to show that he learned from the events 
leading to his separation, as well as a lack of mitigating evidence or reason provided for 
the lengthy AWOL offense, 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.  AR 601-280, paragraph 2-22 (Army Reenlistment Program) - Provides for waivable 
disqualifications. Male and female applicants for Regular Army reen­listment, to whom 
the following disqualifica­tions apply, may be granted waivers to permit immediate 
reenlistment or extension. Only those disqualifications occurring during cur­rent term of 
service and disqualifications not previously revealed, regardless of date of occurrence, 
are considered applicable. Requests for waivers should be submitted sufficiently in 
advance of separation date to permit continuous service. For AWOL/Time Lost, 
requests for waiver may be approved as follows: One through 15 days AWOL/time lost: 
commanders of battalions/battalion size units (05), and/or special court-martial 
authority, as appropriate.

4.  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)	 AR20170012428

4

1