ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Record of Proceedings BOARD DATE: 25 June 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190003413 APPLICANT REQUESTS: The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Applicant Statement 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 believes he was misled and was too young to realize it. He enlisted in the Army, following his father’s footsteps and because he loves his country. He chose the infantry because he wanted to be a warrior and was ready for the challenge. He loved training at Fort Benning and became the platoon guide. a. During basic training he was conned into going to Washington, DC for his first assignment under the pretense it was exciting and there were 10 women for every man. He was young. He became frustrated serving there and requested re-assignment. He desperately wanted to go back to Fort Benning but his First Sergeant wouldn’t allow him to transfer. b. He sought solace in self-medicating to no avail. As a last resort he went to Fort McNair’s Chaplain, who suggested to him to go absent without leave (AWOL). Although he was shocked at what the chaplain suggested, he went AWOL. He turned himself in and accepted a general discharge with other than honorable conditions. c. He regrets going AWOL and wishes he could go back in time to correct or amend the sequence of events. Whenever he discusses his time in the Army he never fails to mention basic training in Fort Benning was awesome and could still do it today. He also recalls standing 10 feet away from President Reagan with a weapon adjacent to “MATT” at Arlington, laying to rest some old warriors. d. He’s laid to rest some personnel demons of late and moving forward as a productive member of the American society. 3. On 7 June 1988, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for three years at the age of 18. 4. On 14 April 1989, the applicant was charged with being absent without leave (AWOL) from 28 February 1989 to on or about 3 April 1989. 5. On 17 April 1989, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. He consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the trial by court-martial, his available rights and the basis for voluntarily requesting discharge under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He signed a request for discharge for the Good of the Service. 6. The applicant’s chain of command recommended approval of his request and the appropriate separation authority approved it on 5 May 1989, directing he be furnished UOTHC discharge. 7. On 26 June 1989, he was discharged accordingly; he completed 11 months and 15 days of net active service. 8. The applicant states he was misled and was too young to realize it. During basic training he was conned into going to Washington, DC for his first assignment under the pretense it was exciting and there were 10 women for every man; he was young. He became frustrated serving there and requested re-assignment. He sought solace in self-medicating to no avail. As a last resort he went to Fort McNair’s Chaplain, who suggested that he go AWOL. Although he was shocked at what the chaplain suggested, he went AWOL. He turned himself in and accepted a general discharge with other than honorable conditions. He regrets going AWOL and wishes he could go back in time to correct or amend the sequence of events. 9. Army Regulation 635-200 states a Chapter 10 is a voluntary discharge request in- lieu of trial by court martial. In a case in which an UOTHC is authorized by regulation, a member may be awarded an honorable or general discharge, if during the current enlistment period of obligated service he has been awarded a personal decoration or if warranted by the particular circumstances of a specific case. 10. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant's petition, his service record, and his statements in light of the published DOD 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 discussed the nature of the applicant’s misconduct, his service record, his statement regarding the reason for his AWOL, the absence of post- service documents of support and whether to apply clemency. The Board determined that there was insufficient evidence to mitigate his misconduct and that the character of service he received at separation was not in error or unjust. 2. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined 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. 7/3/2019 X CHAIRPERSON 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 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 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), as in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel, it states: a. A Chapter 10 (Discharge in Lieu of Trail by Court Martial) is applicable to members who had committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service. The request could be submitted at any time after the charges had been preferred. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, an under other than honorable conditions discharge was normally considered appropriate. b. An honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service has generally met standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. c. 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. 3. 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 a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. 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, 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. 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.