ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	

	BOARD DATE:  8 July 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180005382


APPLICANT REQUESTS: 

*	an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to an honorable 
conditions discharge
*	in effect, change the duty description on DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the 
United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), item 25a (Specialty Number and 
Title) from 57A10 (Duty Soldier) to 72B20 (Communication Center Specialist) 
and item 25b (Related Civilian Occupation and D.O.T. Number) from grave 
digger to dishwasher

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:  DD 
Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record). 

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 a kid and believes he was pressured to take the general 
discharge.  His civilian record is spotless since his discharge.  

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

	a.  He enlisted on 10 March 1965 in the Regular Army. 

	b.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he completed training and 
was awarded the MOS 72B20 on 29 May 1965.

	c.  He served in France from 30 August 1965 to 19 February 1968.  His DA Form 20 
show he performed duties in duty MOS 72B20; duty MOS 11B20 (Security Guard), and 
duty MOS 57A10.

	d.  He was convicted by summary court-martial on 27August 1965 for one 
specification of absence without leave from 23 August 1965 to 25 August 1965.  He was 
sentenced to forfeit $30.  The sentence was approved and ordered duly executed.  

	e.  He accepted nonjudicial punishment on/for:

*	5 April 1966 for leaving his appointed place of duty and disobeying a lawful 
order from a commissioned officer
*	8 September 1966 for sleeping while on duty

	f.  He was convicted by summary court-martial on 9 May 1966 for one specification 
of failing to go to his appointed place of duty, disrespect to a noncommissioned officer, 
and failing to obey a lawful regulation.  He was sentenced to be restricted for one 
month, to forfeit $50 for one month, and to be confined at hard labor for 15 days. 

	g.  On 24 May 1966, the findings of guilty for failing to obey a lawful regulation were 
set aside.  The unexecuted portion of the sentence was approved and ordered duly 
executed.  

	h.  On 1 August 1966, a AE Form 3087 (Report of Psychiatric Evaluation) was 
completed.  He was diagnosed as passive aggressive with immature personality.  

	i.  On 30 August 1966, Special Order Number 148 awarded the applicant primary 
MOS 57A10 and withdrew primary MOS 72B20.  

	j.  He left France on 28 November 1966 enroute to continental United States.  The 
complete facts and circumstances surrounding the immediate commander’s notification 
of intention to separate the applicant are unavailable for the board to review.  

	k.  On 25 October 1966, after consulting with legal counsel, having been advised of 
the contemplated action under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-212 
(Personnel Separations – Discharge for Unfitness and Unsuitability) for unsuitability, he 
acknowledged:

*	he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in the event a 
general discharge under honorable conditions is issued
*	he may be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal 
and State laws if undesirable discharge under conditions other than 
honorable is issued

	l.  The immediate commander initiated separation against the applicant on 27 
October 1966 under the provisions of AR 635-212, paragraph 12b (Unsuitability).  The 
commander based his recommendation on the fact that: 

*	the applicant had performed all tasks required of him in an inefficient manner
*	he was assigned to the tape relay floor of the Strategic Command Facility 
Saran, France in the duty MOS 72B20
*	during the entire time he worked in this MOS, his efficiency was considered to 
be unsatisfactory by his superiors
*	on several occasions, he was counseled regarding this subject, yet he failed 
to respond in all instances
*	he was considered to be lazy and had absolutely no desire to learn or work in 
his MOS
*	he has been assigned other tasks at the Facility, all of which he has 
performed unsatisfactorily 

	m.  On 3 November 1966, the separation authority approved the discharge 
recommendation for immediate separation.  He would be discharged under the 
provisions of AR 635-212 for unsuitability and would be furnished a General Discharge 
Certificate (DD Form 257A).

	n.  On 5 December 1966, he was discharged from active duty under the provisions 
of AR 635-212, Separation Program Number 46A, issued a general, under honorable 
conditions discharge, and .  His DD Form 214 reflects that the completed 1 year, 8 
months, and 23 days active service with 2 days of lost time from 23-24 August 1965.  It 
also shows in item 25a (Specialty Number and Title), the entry “57A, Duty Soldier” and 
in 25b (Related Civilian Occupation and DOT Number), "9.89.91, Grave Digger."  

4.  By regulation (AR 635-212), action will be taken to separate an individual for 
unsuitability when it is clearly established that it is unlikely that he will develop 
sufficiently to participate in further military training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.

5.  By regulation (AR 600-200 (Personnel-General – Enlisted Personnel Management 
System)), an awarded MOS may be withdrawn for demonstrated inefficient performance 
of duty in the technical, supervisory, or other requirements of the MOS.  The DD Form 
214 

6.  By regulation (AR 635-5 (Personnel Separation – Separation Documents)), item 25a 
of the DD Form 214 reflect the primary MOS code number and title.  If the specialty 
represented by the MOS has a related civilian occupation, the appropriate job title and 
code number will be entered from the dictionary or occupational titles in item 25b.  

7.  The DD Form 214 is a summary of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous 
active duty.  The information entered thereon reflects the conditions as they existed at 
the time of separation.

8.  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 pattern of misconduct 
that led to the applicant separation, as well as the applicant already receiving a General 
Discharge, the Board concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice 
which would warrant making a change to the characterization of service.

Additionally, the Board found insufficient evidence to show that the applicant’s MOS 
was improperly annotated on his DD Form 214.  For that reason, the Board 
recommended denying the applicant’s request.

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.



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 635-212 (Personnel Separations – Discharge for Unfitness or 
Unsuitability) then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for administrative 
separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness and unsuitability.  Paragraph 6b provided 
that an individual was subject to separation for unsuitability when one or more of the 
following conditions existed:  (1) inaptitude; (2) character and behavior disorders; (3) 
apathy (lack of appropriate interest, defective attitudes, and inability to expend effort 
constructively); (4) alcoholism; (5) enuresis; and (6) homosexuality (Class III - 
evidenced homosexual tendencies, desires, or interest, but was without overt 
homosexual acts).  When separation for unsuitability was warranted, an honorable or 
general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon 
the individual's entire record.  This same regulation provided that when the discharge 
was based on unsuitability - apathy, defective attitudes and inability to expend effort 
constructively, then Separation Program Number 46A would be used.

3.  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 1-9d (Honorable Discharge) states an honorable discharge is a 
separation with honor.  Issuance of an honorable discharge will be conditioned upon 
proper military behavior and proficient performance of duty during the member’s current 
enlistment of current period of service with due consideration for the member’s age, 
length of service, grade, and general aptitude.  

	b.  Paragraph 1-9e (General Discharge) states a general discharge is a separation 
from the Army under honorable conditions of an individual whose military record is not 
sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

4.  AR 600-200 (Personnel-General – Enlisted Personnel Management System), 
paragraph 2-30b (Withdrawal of MOS), in effect at the time, states an awarded MOS 
may be withdrawn for demonstrated inefficient performance of duty in the technical, 
supervisory, or other requirements of the MOS.  

5.  AR 635-5 (Personnel Separation – Separation Documents), states the DD Form 214 
is a summary of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a 
brief, clear-cut record of all current active, prior active, and prior inactive duty service at 
the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.  The information entered 
thereon reflects the conditions as they existed at the time of separation.  Paragraph 53 
(Items 25a and b), in effect at the time, states item 25a and b of the DD Form 214 
reflects the primary MOS code number and title.  If the specialty represented by the 
MOS has a related civilian occupation, the appropriate job title and code number will be 
entered from the dictionary or occupational titles.   

6.  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)	 AR20180005382

4

1