ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  1 August 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180002042


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

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	Self-Authored Statement
*	DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)

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 was never convicted of anything and was separated for the 
good of the service by false accusations.  He hopes the Board will take into 
consideration his pleas and upgrade his discharge. 

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

	a.  On 28 May 1980 he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA).  On 20 March 1984, he 
immediately reenlisted in the RA.  He served in Hawaii from 23 November 1980 to 
22 November 1983. 

	b.  On 7 September 1984, court-martial charges were preferred against him.  His 
DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) indicates he was charged with:

*	one specification of wrongful distribution of marijuana
*	one specification of wrongful possession of marijuana
*	one specification of wrongful use of marijuana
*	one specification of violating a lawful general regulation 

	c.  On 12 September 1984, after consulting with legal counsel, he subsequently 
requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel 
Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service).  
He acknowledged:

*	maximum punishment
*	he is guilty of the charge(s) against him or of (a) lesser included offense(s)
*	he understood that if his request for discharge was accepted he could be 
discharged under other than honorable conditions
*	he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits
*	he may be ineligible for many or all benefits administrated by the Veterans 
Administration
*	he may be deprived of his rights and benefits of a veteran under both Federal 
and State laws
*	he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life by reason of 
an under other than honorable conditions discharge

	d.  On 2 October 1984, consistent with the chain of command recommendations, the 
separation authority approved the discharge recommendation for separation.  He would 
be discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, with an under other than 
honorable conditions discharge, and reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.  

	e.  On 11 October 1984, he was discharged from active duty under the provisions of 
AR 635-200, chapter 10, and issued a under other than honorable conditions discharge.  
His DD Form 214 reflects he completed 4 years, 4 months, and 14 days of active 
service.  It also shows that he was awarded or was authorized the:

*	Army Service Ribbon
*	Overseas Service Ribbon
*	Good Conduct Medal 
*	Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon
*	Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar
*	Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar

	f.  On 16 July 1997, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed the 
applicant's discharge processing but found it proper and equitable.  The ADRB denied 
his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 

4.  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.  

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 reviewing the application and all supporting documents, to include the DoD 
guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the 
Board determined that relief was not warranted.  Based upon the multiple drug offenses 
include distributing to others, as well as a lack of character evidence submitted by the 
applicant showing he has learned and grown from the events leading to his separation, 
the Board concluded that there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice which 
would warrant making a change to the applicant’s characterization of service.

However, the Board did note that the applicant had a prior period of honorable service 
not reflected on his DD Form 214 and recommended that change be completed to more 
accurately depict the applicant’s military service.

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 28 May 1980 until 19 March 1984.”
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.
	  
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 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.  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 member 
whose military record is satisfactory by not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an 
honorable discharge.

	c.  Chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service) states a member 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 under other than honorable discharge certificate normally is appropriate for a 
member who is discharged for the good of the service.

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 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.  

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180002042

5

1