ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	

	BOARD DATE:  12 March 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170017442


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions 
(UOTHC) discharge to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions 
of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552)
*	DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or 
Discharge), for the period ending 17 February 1972
*	DD Form 258A (Undesirable Discharge Certificate)
*	General Equivalency Diploma (GED), dated 4 March 1983
*	Associate in Applied Science Degree from Ohio University, dated 9 June 2007

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. 
Code (USC), Section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military 
Records (ABCMR) 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:

	a.  At the age of 17 his mother was murdered.  He quit school, got married, and had 
a baby.  He volunteered to join the Army at the age of 19.  He received a "dear john 
letter" from his wife and lost his mind.  At one point, his unit approved him to go back 
home because his wife had miscarried.  He finally turned himself in and went home.  He 
said whatever the Army wanted him to say because he wanted to keep his wife and 
child.

	b.  After he was discharged, he came back and found out that the baby his wife 
miscarried could not have been his.  He also found out that his daughter was not his 
child.  His divorce was finalized in 1973 and he went a little crazy before he realized he 
needed to get himself together.  Since then he has received his GED, Associate in 
Applied Science, and Bachelor's degrees.
3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 May 1969.

4.  The applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) on 8 July 1969, under the 
provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent 
without leave (AWOL) from on or about 6 July 1969 through on or about 8 July 1969.

5.  Special Court-Martial Order Number 47, dated 12 January 1970, shows the applicant 
was tried before a court-martial on 9 January 1970 and was found guilty of AWOL from 
on or about 13 October 1969 through on or about 14 December 1969.  The convening 
authority approved his sentence on 12 January 1970 and ordered it executed.

6.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he was AWOL 
from on or about:

*	2 March 1970 through on or about 8 July 1970
*	8 August 1970 through on or about 28 August 1970
*	19 October 1970 through on or about 10 March 1971
*	26 April 1971 through on or about 14 May 1971
*	11 June 1971 through on or about 7 January 1972

7.  The applicant's record does not contain his separation packet.  However, it does 
contain a DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 17 February 1972, under the 
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), 
for the good of the service.

8.  The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade 
of his discharge.  The ADRB determined he was properly and equitably discharged and 
denied his request on 4 October 1974 and 10 August 1977.

9.  The Board should consider the applicant's statement and provided evidence 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 and post-service 
achievements were carefully considered.  The Board agreed the 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 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.


ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S):

Not Applicable

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 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 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted 
personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and 
entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is 
appropriate when the quality of the member'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 characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

	b.  Paragraph 3-7b states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under 
honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to Soldiers whose military record is 
satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

3.  The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to 
Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records 
on 25 July 2018, regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations.  Clemency 
generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence.  Boards for 
Correction of Military/Naval Records 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 a discharge, 
which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds.  

	a.  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 on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency 
grounds, Boards 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.  

	b.  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)	 AR20170017442

2

1