ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 June 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170013575 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). FACTS: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20120003268 on 10 October 2012. 2. The applicant states his grandfather was sick at the time and he went home to watch his sister. He was wrong, but prior to that his service was honorable. 3. A review of the applicant’s service record shows: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 December 1972. b. He was convicted by special court-martial on 17 July 1973 for unlawfully receiving U.S. currency. His sentence consisted of confinement at hard labor for 30 days and forfeiture of $180 for 3 months. c. He received nonjudicial punishment on 29 March 1973 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 11 February 1973 to 17 March 1973. d. Court-martial charges were preferred on the applicant on 15 January 1974 for two specifications of being AWOL from 13 August 1973 to 10 September 1973 and from 11 September 1973 to 8 January 1974. e. He consulted with legal counsel and subsequently requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel). He acknowledged: a. * 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 ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration * 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 by reason of an undesirable discharge f. Consistent with the chain of command recommendations, on 9 February 1974, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, AR 635-200. He would be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate and reduced to the lowest grade. g. He was discharged from active duty on 4 March 1974 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge characterization of service. His DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) shows he completed 5 months and 28 days of active service with 262 days lost. It also shows he was awarded or authorized: * National Defense Service Medal * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Hand Grenade Bar * Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16) 4. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board on two occasions and on 22 December 1974 and 25 May 1982, his applications for an upgrade of his discharge were denied. 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 it 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, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to grant relief. The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. The Board applied Department of Defense standards for consideration of discharge upgrade requests 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. Based upon a preponderance of evidence, the Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization was warranted as a result of the misconduct. 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20120003268 on 10 October 2012. Expired certificate 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): Not Applicable REFERENCES: 1. 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 1-9d (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 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. An Undesirable Discharge Certificate will normally be furnished an individual who is discharged for the good of the service. 2. 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 from 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 other corrections, including changes in the 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, 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 upgrade service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS//