ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	 

	BOARD DATE: 23 September 2019 

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180016820


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) 
discharge be upgraded to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of 
the United States), dated 10 November 2018
*	Orders 10-125-00041, issued by Headquarters, 143rd Sustainment Command 
(Expeditionary), Orlando, Florida on 5 May 2010
*	Orders 10-125-00002, issued by Headquarters, 143rd Sustainment Command 
(Expeditionary), Orlando, Florida on 5 May 2010
*	Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) letter, dated 14 January 2013

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S.  
Code (USC), Section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military 
Records (ABCMR) 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 her discharge was for not attending her scheduled unit training 
assemblies due to her living arrangements.  At the time, she was an unstable 17 year 
old with a child but no parents.  She has turned her life around and her goal is to 
reenlist.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 12 January 2008.

4.  The applicant entered active duty on 21 January 2009, for the purpose of completing 
her initial entry training.  She served on active duty through 24 April 2009, was awarded 
military occupational Specialty 63B (Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic), and was released 
from active duty and returned to the control of her USAR unit of assignment.

5.  The applicant's record is void of any documentation related to her USAR separation, 
with the exception of her discharge orders.  These orders show she was discharged 
under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army 
Reserve Enlisted Administrative Separations); however, they do not cite the applicable 
paragraph relative to her separation.  Her characterization of service is shown as 
UOTHC.

6.  In reaching its determination, the Board should consider the applicant's petition, her 
service record, and her statements in light of the published Department of Defense 
guidance on equity, injustice, or clemency.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, 
evidence in the records and published DoD guidance for consideration of discharge 
upgrade requests.  The Board considered the applicant’s statement, her available 
record of service, her discharge after MOS training, the absence of a USAR separation 
packet and her separation orders.  The Board found insufficient evidence of USAR 
service documents or misconduct other than her statement and the applicant provided 
no evidence of post-service achievements of letters of reference in support of a 
clemency determination.  Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board 
determined that the character of service the applicant received upon separation was not 
in error or unjust.

2.  After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that 
relief was not warranted.




















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.

ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S):

Not Applicable










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 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 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for 
correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  
The regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the 
presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an 
error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

3.  Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of USAR 
enlisted personnel.  It states:

   a.  An honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to 
benefits provided by law.  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.  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.  A characterization of under 
honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation 
specifically allows such characterization.
   
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 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 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 governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was 
committed, and uniformity of punishment.  

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

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180016820
	
3

1