ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD DATE: 23 July 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190001520 APPLICANT REQUESTS: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), dated 21 September 2018 * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), for the period ending 15 September 1986 * character reference letter, dated 19 September 2018 * character reference letter, dated 24 October 2018 * character reference letter, undated 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 he believes he is an upright citizen. He earned an expert infantryman badge within a short period of time. He has three children that have been homeschooled up to the third grade and then they were placed in public for their socialization. He has coached ball teams from 1996 through 2011. He is a faithful church member and was a custodial and maintenance man for the church. He once had trouble with alcohol but since his lifestyle change, he no longer does. He has had sessions with a psychologist, who has successfully treated him for his alcohol problem. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 October 1984. He completed training as a light weapons infantryman and he was awarded the Expert Infantryman Badge on 25 February 1986. 4. The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment on 19 March 1986, under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for wrongfully using marijuana from on or about 10 February through on or about 20 February 1986. 5. Court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant on 25 June 1986 for violation of the UCMJ. His DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) shows he was charged with being absent without leave (AWOL), from on or about 13 May through on or about 18 June 1986. 6. The applicant consulted with legal counsel on or about 25 June 1986. a. He was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the possible effects of an under other than honorable conditions discharge, and the procedures and rights that were available to him. b. Subsequent to receiving legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 10, for the good of the service – in lieu of trial by court- martial. In his request for discharge, he acknowledged his understanding that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charge against him, or of a lesser included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He further acknowledged he understood that if his discharge request was approved he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, and he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws. c. He was advised he could submit any statements he desired in his own behalf. His request shows he made an election not to submit a statement. 7. The separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge on 21 August 1986 and directed the issuance of a DD Form 794A (UOTHC Discharge Certificate). 8. The applicant was discharged on 15 September 1986, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court- martial. His DD Form 214 confirms he was discharged in the lowest enlisted grade and his service was characterized as UOTHC. 9. The applicant was charged due to the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. Subsequent to being charged, he consulted with counsel and requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10. Such discharges are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 10. The applicant provides three letters from friends and acquaintances attesting to his good character and post-service conduct. 11. The Board should consider the applicant's statement in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. 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, his service record, the frequency and nature of his misconduct, the reason for his separation and whether to apply clemency. The Board found insufficient evidence of in-service mitigation to overcome his misconduct, but considered the applicant’s post-service conduct and 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 too harsh and that an upgrade as a matter of clemency was warranted. 2. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : X :X :X GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending his DD Form 214 for the period of service ending 15 September 1986 to reflect in item 24 (Character of Service) – “Honorable” vice “Under other than honorable conditions.” 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 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a states that 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. Paragraph 3-7b states 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 10 states that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions would normally be furnished to an individual who was discharged for the good of the service. 3. 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) AR20190001520 6 1