ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


		BOARD DATE:  25 July 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180008538


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions 
discharge to honorable.

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 is requesting an upgrade of his discharge characterization to 
honorable.  The urine and blood tests of the 1980’s and 1990’s were known to be 
flawed and he is confident that his was analyzed incorrectly.  He would like his 
discharge reconsidered to restore his honor.  He would like his family to know that he 
served his country with pride and honor.

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

   a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 May 1971.  He reenlisted on 26 February 
1973, 28 January 1975, 2 January 1980, and 2 June 1985.  He served in a variety of 
stateside or overseas assignments, including foreign service in:  

*	Vietnam from 9 March 1972 to 23 June 1972
*	Germany from 15 March 1975 to 14 March 1978
*	Germany from 22 March 1982 to 17 March 1984
*	Korea from 18 December 1985 to 31 July 1987

   b.  A letter of reprimand, dated 13 March 1987, was imposed as punishment under 
Article 15 and part of a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ) 
not found in the service record.  The letter of reprimand states:

*	the applicant was reprimanded for his presence at a Korean residence where 
illegal transactions involving prohibited substances took place
*	he was in possession of a smoking device containing trace amounts of 
methamphetamine and resisted apprehension, impeding law enforcement 
personnel
*	as a sergeant first class in a position of trust, he fell short of expectations to 
set a proper example for Soldiers and was directed to take corrective 
measures to preclude such misconduct

   c.  Two DA Form 4187s (Personnel Action) indicated the applicant was absent 
without leave (AWOL) from 17 February 1988 to 18 February 1988.

   d.  On 15 April 1988, the applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant of 
his intent to separate him under the provisions of Chapter 14, Army Regulation (AR) 
635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) for commission of a serious 
offense.  The specific reasons for his proposed recommendation are:  Disobeying a 
lawful command from his captain, unlawful possession and distribution of cocaine; 
wrongful use of cocaine; wrongful use of cocaine, wrongful and unlawful uttering checks 
with intent to defraud and for procurement of lawful currency.  The applicant 
acknowledged receipt of the notification of separation action on the same day.

	e.  On 19 April 1988, after consulting with legal counsel, he requested an 
administrative separation board.  He also acknowledged: 

*	the rights available to him and the effect of waiving said rights
*	he may encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge 
under other than honorable conditions is issued to him
*	he may apply to the ADRB or the ABCMR for upgrading
*	he is ineligible to apply for enlistment in the Army for 2 years after discharge

   f.  On 20 April 1988, the immediate commander initiated separation action against 
the applicant for serious acts of misconduct.  He recommended that his period of 
service be characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  The intermediate 
commanders recommended approval.

   g.  On 6 May 1988, the commanding general referred the case to an administrative 
separation board and advised him that the least favorable characterization of service 
which could be recommended by the board was under other than honorable conditions, 
consistent with the chain of command recommendations.

   h.  On 27 May 1988, an administrative separation board was convened and having 
carefully considered the evidence, the board found preponderance of the evidence 
supported the following:  wrongful use of cocaine on 15 March 1988; wrongful use of 
cocaine on 28 March 1988; and wrongful and unlawful utterance of checks on 17, 18, & 
19 February 1988. The administrative separation board recommended the applicant be 
eliminated from the service for serious misconduct, but in view of 17 years of service, 
recommend that he receive a General Discharge.

	i.  Consistent with the findings and recommendations of the board, the separation 
authority approved the discharge recommendation for immediate separation under the 
provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c for commission of a serious 
offense.  He would be issued a General Discharge Certificate. 

	j.  On 17 June 1988, he was discharged from active duty with a general, under 
honorable conditions characterization of service.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he completed 17 years and 22 days of 
active service with one day of lost time.  It also shows he was awarded or authorized:

*	Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal
*	Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm 
*	Army Service Ribbon
*	Vietnam Service Medal
*	Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon
*	National Defense Service Medal
*	Army Good Conduct Medal (5th Award)
*	Armed Achievement Medal (6th Oak Leaf Cluster)
*	Overseas Service Ribbon
*	Army Commendation Medal (3rd Oak Leaf Cluster)
*	Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16)

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, action will be taken to separate a Soldier for misconduct when it is 
clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him or her as a 
satisfactory Soldier, further effort is unlikely to succeed.  

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 the misconduct 
involved in the applicant’s separation included multiple drug offenses, including the 
distributing drugs to others, the Board concluded that the characterization of service 
received at the time of separation was appropriate.

However, the Board did note that the applicant had a prior period of 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 25 May 1971 until 1 June 1985.”
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 but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an 
honorable discharge.

   c.  Chapter 14 of the regulation states action will be taken to separate a Soldier for 
misconduct when it is clearly established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop 
him or her as a satisfactory Soldier, further effort is unlikely to succeed.  

3.  Army Regulation 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 regarding equity, injustice or clemency determinations.  
Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence and 
BCMRs may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial forum.  However, the 
guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also 
applies to any other corrections, including changes in discharge, which may be 
warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds.  The 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, 
an injustice, or clemency grounds, BCMRs shall consider the twelve stated principles in 
the guidance as well as eighteen individual factors related to an applicant.  These 
factors include the severity of the misconduct and the length of time since the 
misconduct.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180008538

6

1