ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  27 June 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180003452


APPLICANT REQUESTS: 

*	upgrade his other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable 
conditions discharge
*	restore his rank to specialist four (SP4)/E-4

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
*	Congressman R. A. Privacy Release Form
*	Louisiana Driver’s License
*	Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Claims Intake Coversheet
*	VA Form 21-526EZ (Application for Disability Compensation and Related 
Compensation Benefits)
*	VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim)

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 would like his other than honorable conditions discharge 
upgraded to an honorable discharge as well as his rank restored to SP4/E-4.  His 
discharge was improper because the command did not follow the discharge regulations 
for a court-martial.  

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214, and his Louisiana driver’s license.  He also 
provides:


	a.  Congressman XXXXX Privacy Release Form, dated 27 September 2018, in 
which he stated that the failed to get his discharge upgraded and his benefits.

	b.  Department of Veterans Affairs Claims Intake Coversheet, dated 6 July 2018, to 
which he indicates that he has included medical documents.

	c.  VA Form 21-526EZ, page 8, which list his disabilities.

	d.  VA Form 21-4138, dated 3 August 2018, states he was clear from drug testing 
and stayed clear for decades.  Record of his military character stated that he served 
honorably and stayed positive.  He was never absent without leave.  There was another 
case similar to his involving another member of his unit.  That other member received a 
promotion while he was reduced in rank and discharged.  During his case, he 
cooperated with the officials in getting the names of the other people involved in the 
drug cases, but there was no reward for his cooperation.

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

	a.  He enlisted on 19 February 1985 in the Regular Army (RA).  He immediately 
reenlisted in the RA on 7 September 1987.  

	b.  The complete facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s court-martial 
charges are unavailable for the Board to review.  However, his service record contains 
his request for discharge for the good of the service and DD Form 214 which outline his 
reason for separation.

	c.  After consulting with legal counsel in April 1988, 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 was guilty of the charges against him or of a lesser included offense
*	he has no desire to perform further military service
*	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 because of an 
under other than honorable discharge

	d.  On 5 December 1988, consistent with the chain of command recommendations, 
the separation authority approved the discharge recommendation for immediate 
separation.  He would be discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, 
discharged under other than honorable conditions, and reduced to the lowest enlisted 
grade.

	e.  On 19 December 1988, 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 that he completed 3 years, 10 months, and 1 day 
of active service.  It also shows that he was award or authorized the:

*	Army Service Ribbon
*	Overseas Service Ribbon
*	Army Achievement Medal
*	Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar
*	Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar

5.  By regulation, 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.  

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 review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined relief is not 
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 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 the documentary evidence provided by the applicant and found 
within the service record, the Board concluded that there was insufficient evidence to 
show that an error or injustice was present which would warrant making a change to the 
characterization of service.  Additionally, with a Chapter 10, the rank reduction is an 
automatic reduction; therefore, no error or injustice concerning the applicant’s rank 
requires correction.

However, the Board did note that the applicant did have a prior period of honorable 
service which was not currently reflected on his DD Form 214 and recommended that 
change be made 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 19 February 1985 until 6 September 1987.”
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 (AR) 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) 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.

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180003452

6

1