ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	
	BOARD DATE:  19 July 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180006092


APPLICANT REQUESTS: an upgrade of his discharge from under honorable conditions 
(general) to honorable.

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)

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, in effect, he made a mistake while on active duty in the U.S. 
Army.  He was young at the time and regrets his mistake.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, showing in item 24 (Character of 
Service), he received a under honorable conditions (general) discharge.

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

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 April 1978 and maintained continuous 
honorable service through 29 October 1980.  He immediately reenlisted for 4 years on 
30 October 1980.

	b.  He accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 
on/for:

*	on 16 January 1981, for the improper wear of his camouflage fatigues uniform 
off-post at a court house; his punishment consisted, in part, of a reduction in 
rank to private first class/E-3
*	on 14 May 1982, for absenting himself from his unit from 24-29 April 1982; his 
punishment consisted, in part, of a reduction in rank to private first class/E-3

	c.  On 19 January 1983, the applicant and his immediate commander signed a 
DA Form 4126-R (Bar to Reenlistment Certificate), notifying him that a recommendation 
for a bar to reenlistment had been initiated against him due to his record of NJP and 
negative counseling.  He acknowledged he received a copy of this bar and that he had 
been counseled and advised on the basis for the action.  The applicant indicated that he 
desired to submit a statement on his behalf, but his record was void of his statement.

	d.  The Bar to Reenlistment recommendation was approved by the approving 
authority on 24 February 1983 and was recommended by his immediate commander on 
21 September 1983.

	e.  On 23 March 1984, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under 
the provisions of Article 15, for failing to go to the appointed place of duty at the 
prescribed time.  His punishment consisted, in part, of a reduction in rank to private first 
class/E-3.

	f.  On 4 June 1984, the applicant’s immediate commander notified him of his intent 
to initiate separation proceedings against him under the provisions of AR 635-200 
(Personnel Separations-Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13 for what he determined to be 
extremely poor performance over a long period of time.  The commander advised him of 
his rights to counsel and provided him an opportunity to submit statements on his 
behalf.

	g.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander’s intent to separate him.  
He consulted with legal counsel who advised him of the basis for the contemplated 
separation action for unsatisfactory performance, the type of discharge he could receive 
and its effect on further enlistment or reenlistment, the possible effects of this discharge, 
and of the procedures/rights available to him.  He elected to submit a statement in his 
behalf, but his record was void of his statement.  He acknowledged:

*	he understood he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian 
life if a general discharge under honorable conditions were issued to him
*	he understood he could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran 
under Federal and State laws as a result of the issuance of a discharge under 
other than honorable conditions
*	he understood if he received a discharge characterization of less than 
honorable, he could make an application to the Army Discharge Review 
Board (ADRB) or the ABCMR for an upgrade, but he understood that an act 
of consideration by either board did not imply his discharge would be 
upgraded  

	h.  On 4 June 1984, the applicant’s immediate commander recommended he be 
separated under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200 for unsatisfactory 
performance because the applicant was often absent or late for formations and his 
overall performance was determined to be substandard.

	i.  On 7 June 1984, the separation authority approved the applicant to be discharged 
under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance, directed 
the applicant to receive a General Discharge Certificate, and determined the applicant 
would not be transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve.

	j.  The applicant was discharged on 14 May 1987.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged for unsatisfactory 
performance, under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13, with his service 
characterized as general under honorable conditions.  He completed 6 years, 2 months, 
and 13 days of active service with lost time from 24 -28 April 1982 and 25-31 May 1984.

	k.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons 
Awarded or Authorized) shows the applicant was awarded or authorized:

*	Parachute Badge
*	Expert Marksmanship Badge with Rifle Bar

5.  There is no evidence the applicant has applied to the Army Discharge Review Board 
for review of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

6.  By regulation (AR 635-200), Soldiers are subject to separation under the provisions 
of chapter 13, when he or she is unqualified for further military service because of 
unsatisfactory performance.  An honorable or under honorable conditions (general) 
discharge was an appropriate and authorized characterization of service. 

7.  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 a pattern of misconduct 
and 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 applicant’s characterization of service.

However, the Board did note that the applicant had a period of prior honorable service 
which is not currently reflected on his DD Form 214 and recommended that change be 
completed to more accurately depict his 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 4 April 1978 until 29 October 1980.”
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), set forth the basic authority 
for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is given when the quality of 
the Soldier's service has generally met standards of acceptable conduct and duty 
performance.

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

	c.  Chapter 13 provides Soldiers are subject to separation under the provisions of 
chapter 13, when he or she is unqualified for further military service because of 
unsatisfactory performance.  An honorable or under honorable conditions (general) 
discharge was an appropriate and authorized characterization of service. 

3.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the 
separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, 
release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.  It also established 
standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.

	a.  It states that the entry in Item 11 (Primary Specialty Number, Title and Years and 
Months in Specialty (Additional specialty numbers and titles involving periods of one or 
more years)) would be the primary military occupational specialty (MOS) held by the 
member on the date of separation as recorded on his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel 
Qualification Record – Part II).

	b.  It states that the entry 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.  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 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 government acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was 
committed, and uniformity of punishment.

	b.  Changes to the narrative reason for the 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 has the upgraded service characterization.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180006092

4

1