ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


IN THE CASE OF: 
	BOARD DATE:  30 May 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180000905


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  reconsideration of previous request to upgrade his general, 
under honorable conditions discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	Certificate of Achievement (2)
*	DA Form 2166-6 (Enlisted Evaluation Report)
*	DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from Active Duty)
*	DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
*	National Personnel Records Center Letter

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 AR20090015089 on 11 March 2010.

2.  The applicant states he would like a revision on his discharge because in his past 
service of over 5 years he did not have any problem.  He signed a waiver voluntarily 
based on personal reason.  If the Board checks his files, it would be clear he did not 
have any misconduct.  He cites a previous year performance evaluation.

3.  The applicant provides copies of 2 certificates of achievement awarded him for 
outstanding performance, dedication to duty and willingness to work late hours with a 
can-do attitude for the years of 1981 and 1982.  His DA Form 2166-6 shows he was a 
hard working noncommissioned officer (NCO) who led by example.  As a squad leader 
he set high standards for himself and his men.  He was scored highly by his rater both 
for professionalism and performance.



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

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 May 1978.  [His DD Form 214 (Certificate 
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) reflects a different date of 24 May 1978].

	b.  He reenlisted on 23 November 1981. 

	c.  He received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 on/for:

*	31 October 1983, for disobeying a lawful order from his superior NCO; he was 
reduced to E-4
*	28 November 1983, for failure to be at his appointed place of duty; he was 
reduced to E-3

	d.  On 17 February 1984, the applicant’s immediate commander notified him of his 
intent to initiate elimination action against him in accordance with chapter 13-12c of 
Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) for 
unsatisfactory performance, because he was unable to respect authority or conform to 
military standards.

	e.  The applicant acknowledged receipt.  He consulted with legal counsel.  He 
waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived a personal appearance 
before a board of officers, and elected to submit statements on his own behalf to include 
26 enclosures of his awards, certificates of appreciation, school completion certificates 
his enlisted evaluations reports and his military occupational specialty test scores.  He 
acknowledged:

*	he had been advised of the basis for the contemplated action under the 
provisions of chapter 13, AR 635-200
*	he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general 
discharge under honorable conditions was issued to him 
*	he understood if he received a discharge certificate less than honorable, he 
may make application to the Army Discharge Review Board or the Army 
Board for Correction of Military Records for upgrading but that does not imply 
that his discharge would be upgraded
*	he may, up until the date of the discharge authority directs or approves his 
discharge, withdraw his waiver and request a board of officers hear his case

	f.  On 21 February 1984, the unit commander recommended separation under the 
provisions of chapter 13, AR 635-200 for unsatisfactory performance.

	g.  On that same date the separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge 
under the provisions of chapter 13, AR 635-200 and directed that he be issued a 
General, Under Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.

	h.  On 1 March 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Army.  His DD Form 
214 shows he was discharged in accordance with chapter 13 of AR 635-200 for 
unsatisfactory performance with an under honorable conditions characterization of 
service.  He completed 5 years, 9 months, and 9 days of active service.  It also shows 
he was awarded or authorized:

*	Army Good Conduct Medal
*	Army Achievement Medal
*	Army Service Ribbon
*	Overseas Service Ribbon
*	Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon (2)

	i.  The applicant petitioned to the ABCMR seeking a discharge upgrade.  The 
ABCMR, after considering his case on 11 March 2010 denied his request.

5.  By regulation a Soldier may be separated per this chapter when it is determined that 
he or she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory 
performance.  Commanders will separate a Soldier for unsatisfactory performance when 
it is clearly established that: In the commander’s judgment, the Soldier will not develop 
sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and /or become a satisfactory 
Soldier.

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 reviewing the application and all supporting documents, to include the DoD 
guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the 
Board determined that partial relief was warranted.  Based upon the pattern of 
misconduct and the applicant already receiving a general discharge, the Board 
concluded there was no error or injustice which would warrant changing the applicant’s 
characterization of service.

However, the Board did note that the applicant had a term of prior honorable service 
which was not captured on his DD Form 214 and recommended that change be 
completed to more accurately depict the military service of the applicant.



BOARD VOTE:
Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

X	X	X	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  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 
following additional statement to block 18 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214:  “Continuous 
honorable active service from 780523-811122.”
2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a 
portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of 
the application that pertains to upgrading the characterization of his discharge.
3.  The Board also noted that administrative note below by the analyst of record and 
recommended that change be completed to more accurately depict the military service 
of the applicant.
	  
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):

A review of the applicant’s record shows his DD Form 214 had a different date of entry 
from the DD Form 4.  As a result amend his DD Form 214 to correct his date of entry 
item 12a from 24 May 1978 to 23 May 1978



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, set forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of 
enlisted personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a (Honorable Discharge) states an honorable discharge is a 
separation with honor.  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.  Chapter 13, of the regulation provides for separation due to unsatisfactory 
performance when a member may be separated per this chapter when it is determined 
that he or she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory 
performance.  Commanders will separate a Soldier for unsatisfactory performance 
when it is clearly established that:  In the commander’s judgment, the Soldier will not 
develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and /or become a 
satisfactory Soldier.  The seriousness of the circumstances is such that the Soldier’s 
retention would have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order, and morale.

3.  AR 635-8 (Separations Processing and Documents), currently in effect, provides for 
the preparation and distribution of the DD Form 214.  It states for item 18 (Remarks) to 
Soldiers who have previously reenlisted without being issued a DD Form 214 and are 
separated with any characterization of service except “Honorable”, enter “Continuous 
Honorable Active Service from” (first day of service for which DD Form 214 was not 
issued) Until (date before commencement of current enlistment).

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 (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 a 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 on the basis of 
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, 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.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180000905

5

1