ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 July 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170016567 APPLICANT REQUESTS: an upgrade of his uncharacterized discharge APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) * Certificate of completion for NRA Range Safety Officer Course * Certificate of completion for Law Enforcement Firearms Instructor for Handgun & Shotgun Course 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 worked three years with Lockheed Martin and he was contracted to the Navy as a weapon instruction and range safety officer for the Marine Corps, Navy and DOD police officers. During this time, he had the chance to serve his country in a way that he was not allowed to when he was released from his Reserve unit when he was younger on his own and living off just the pay he was getting from his drills, so he took a job working on a drilling rig which had him offshore for long periods of time. 3. A review of the applicant’s service record shows: a. He enlisted in the Army Reserve on 2 September 1987. b. He was notified on 27 September 1988 that he had 4 unexcused absences within a 1 year period. c. He was notified on 27 February 1989 that he had 12 unexcused absences within a 1 year period. a. d. On 5 April 1989, he was reassigned from his reserve unit in Houma, LA and assigned to US Army Reserve Control Group, St Louis under the provisions of AR 14- 10, paragraph 4-1a for unsatisfactory participation. e. He was discharged with a separation date of 19 ‘February 1988, under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 4. His character of service was entry level status. It further shows he was awarded or authorized: * Expert Qualification Badge M16 with Rifle Bar * Expert Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar * Army Service Ribbon 4. By regulation members are subject to separation upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation. 5. 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, the Board determined relief is 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 find evidence of error, injustice, or inequity based upon new policy guidance. He completed a period of active duty while conducting initial entry training (IET). He was awarded a MOS at the completion of IET and was transferred back to the USAR. Army Regulation 635-8 provides that when a RC Soldier successfully completes IADT, the character of service is Honorable unless directed otherwise by the separation authority. Based upon regulatory guidance, the Board agreed the DD Form 214 for the period ending 19 February 1988 should show his character of service as honorable. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 X X X 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 partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by adding the upgrading the characterization of service on the applicant’s DD Form 214, dated 19 February 1988 to Honorable. 7/17/2019 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. 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) 635-200 (Personnel Separations), in effect at the time, sets forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. 3. Paragraph 3-7a (Honorable Discharge) states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’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 characterizations would be clearly inappropriate. b. Paragraph 3-7b (General Discharge) states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Paragraph 3-9a (Entry Level Separation) states a separation will be described as an entry level separation if processing is initiated while a soldier is in entry level status. 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS//