ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Record of Proceedings  
IN THE CASE OF:  
BOARD DATE:  8 July 2019 
DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20190004175 
APPLICANT REQUESTS:  The applicant requests he discharge be upgraded to 
under honorable conditions (general). 
APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 
? DD Form 293 (Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) 
? 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 there was no injustice in his case; he was young with no 
common sense.  He started drinking because he felt lost and homesick; he felt he 
didn’t have a purpose.  He hasn’t had a drink in seventeen years and is a happy 
person now. He loves his family very much.  Life is good.
3.	On 18 January 1978, at the age of 21, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army .
He completed advanced individual training and on 29 May 1978 he was assigned as an 
Infantryman to the 2nd Infantry Division in Korea.  The Division was assigned to guard 
portions of the Demilitarized Zones (DMZ).
4.	On or about 13 July 1978 to on or about 9 February 1979 the applicant received 
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on six separate occasions for:
•	Failing to go to his appointed place of duty on three separate occasions
•	Willfully fail to pull fire guard
•	Failing to have in his possession his Armed Forces Liberty Card while off duty
•	Failure to follow a lawful order
•	Absent without leave (AWOL) for three days
5.	On 14 June 1979, the applicant underwent a General Court-Martial and was found 
guilty for being AWOL on four separate occasions, spanning between on or about 16 
February 1979 to on or about 21 March 1979.
6.	On 19 June 1979 the sentence was adjudged and he was sentenced to be confined 
at hard labor for nine months; forfeiture of $300.00 pay per month for six months; 
and be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge.
7.	On 13 February 1980, he received NJP for failing to obey a lawful order by 
participating in gambling and having in his possession a one pint bottle of liquor in an 
unauthorized area while assigned to the United States Army Retraining Brigade 
(USARB).
8.	On 3 December 1980, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  His DD Form 
214shows he completed 1 year, 11 months, and 29 days of net active service.
9.	Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) provides a Soldier would be 
given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general 
or special court-martial and that the appellate review must be completed and the 
affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.
10.	Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the 
judicial process.  The Board has is not empowered to set aside a conviction, but is 
only empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial 
process.
11.	The applicant states he was young with no common sense.  He started drinking 
because he felt lost and homesick.  He hasn’t had a drink in seventeen years and is 
a happy person now.  His records show he was 21 when he enlisted with his first 
duty assignment as an infantryman in an Infantry Division assigned to guard the 
DMZ.
a.	His first NJP occurred within 45 days of his assignment and continued
throughout his tour.  The highest rank he held was PV2 (E2) and was sent to the 
retraining brigade prior to discharge.   
b.	In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant's petition, his
service record, and his statements in light of the published guidance on equity, injustice, 
or clemency. 
BOARD DISCUSSION: 
After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined there is 
insufficient evidence to grant relief.  The board applied Office of the Secretary of 
Defense standards of liberal consideration and clemency to the complete evidentiary 
record, including the applicant’s statement and found insufficient evidence of error, 
injustice, or inequity; the applicant’s service record exhibits numerous instances of 
misconduct during the 1 year and 11 months of the applicant’s time in service.  
Additionally, the Board noted that the applicant had no wartime service, no personal 
awards and insufficient evidence of mitigating circumstances for the misconduct.  The 
applicant provided insufficient evidence of post-service achievements and no letters of 
reference in support of a clemency determination.  Based on a preponderance of 
evidence, the Board agreed that the applicant’s discharge characterization is 
appropriate. 
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. 
12/17/2019
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 15–185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) 
prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the 
Secretary of the 
Army, acting through the Army Board for Correction of Military Records 
(ABCMR).  Paragraph 2-9 states 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 635-200 (Personnel Separations), then in effect, set forth the 
basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 
  
a.	Chapter 11 in effect at that time established policy and procedures for separating 
members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge and provided that a Soldier 
would be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a 
general or special court-martial and that the appellate review must be completed and 
the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. 
  
b.	A general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  
When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but 
not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.   
  
4.	Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the 
judicial process.  In accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, the authority 
under which this Board acts, the ABCMR is not empowered to set aside a conviction.  
Rather, it is only empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the 
court-martial process and then only if clemency is determined to be appropriate.  
Clemency is an act of mercy or instance of leniency to moderate the severity of the 
punishment imposed. 
  
5.	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 courtmartial.  
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. 
 
//NOTHING FOLLOWS// 
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) 	 AR20190004175 
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) 	 AR20190004175 
1 
4 

1