BOARD DATE: 8 October 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190010459 APPLICANT REQUESTS: The applicant requests: * reconsideration to upgrade his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge * personal appearance before the Board APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * Self-Authored Statement, dated 12 June 2019 in lieu of DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for period ending 6 March 1987 * DD Form 214 for period ending 11 May 1989 * Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Rating Decision, dated 20 April 2017 * VA Rating Decision, dated 19 November 2018 * A Letter, Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP), dated 20 November 2018 * Congressman D.C., U.S. Congressman: Privacy Release Form, dated 25 July 2019 * Self-Authored Statement * Applicants Letter to Ms. V.B. * Applicant’s Social Security Card, dated 7 April 2014 * Applicant’s Texas Identification Card, issued 23 January 2019 * Congressman D.C. Letter, dated 5 August 2019 * Email from Ms. V.B. to U.S. Army Pentagon, Headquarters Department of the Army (HQDA), Office, Chief of Legislative Liaison (OCLL), Congressional Liaison Inquiries (CLI) Email Message, dated 5 August 2019 FACTS: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090004878 on 1 September 2009. 2. The applicant describes: * His life before he joined the Army and the reasons why he joined * His life in the military and how the problems in his marriage resulted in him drinking alcohol and staying out at night, which led to his discipline issues and the research on how stress in the military is linked to alcohol use and post- traumatic stress disorder * His life after the military and how he continued to drink until he met someone who introduced him to Alcohol Anonymous (AA); he has been clean and sober for 20 plus years * How alcoholism and drug addiction relate to the military community and that it is a disease; he is 60 years old, legally blind, and have health problems; and he has a chance to make it right and can live his life knowing he served his country honorably 3. Having prior enlisted service in the U.S. Army Reserve, on 20 January 1988, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a term of 4 years. 4. On 1 March 1989, the applicant went absent without leave (AWOL), he was apprehended at 1500 hours, 2 March 1989 and confined by civil authorities, pending trial. On 7 March 1989, he was returned to military control because his civilian case was dismissed without trial. On 17 March 1989, he was apprehended and placed in civilian confinement pending trial (release date unknown). 5. On 30 March 1989, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for one specification each of: * assault upon a female by striking her in the neck, face, and arm with his fist, and inflicting grievous bodily harm: a broken left arm-wrist portion, lacerations to her face and neck * being AWOL from 1 March 1989 to 2 March 1989 * breaking restriction. 6. The applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the assault charge. 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 AR 635-200, chapter 10. He elected not to submit statements on his own behalf. 7. The separation is void of the chain of command recommendations. On 26 April 1989, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant's request directing that he be discharged with an under other than honorable discharge and he be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. 8. On 11 May 1989, he was discharged accordingly. His service was characterized as UOTHC under Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of a court-martial. He completed 1 year, 3 months, and 22 days of net active service this period. His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded or authorized the Army Service Ribbon: 9. The applicant provides: * Self-Authored Statement, dated 12 June 2019, discussed above * DD Form 214 for period ending 6 March 1987, shows he was released from active duty training under an entry level status * DD Form 214 for period ending 11 May 1989, discussed above * VA Rating Decision, dated 20 April 2017, shows a previous claim denial of service connection for glaucoma, bilateral eyes was confirmed and continued; the evidence showed the condition was not incurred in or aggravated by military service * VA Rating Decision, dated 19 November 2018, shows a previous claim denial of service connection for glaucoma, bilateral eyes was confirmed and continued * A Letter, RAMP, dated 20 November 2018, shows the denial was confirmed and continued * Congressman D.C., U.S. Congressman: Privacy Release Form, dated 25 July 2019, with the following enclosures: * Self-Authored Statement to the Congressman D.C., requesting assistance in upgrading his discharge; reasons why he believes he deserves an upgrade; and he indicated that he would explain his reasons to the Board * Applicants letter to Ms. V.B. in which he states he would like his UOTHC upgraded to an honorable and that he is unable to receive benefits with a UOTHC * Applicant’s Social Security Card, dated 7 April 2014, shows his name and social security number * Applicant’s Texas Identification Card, issued 23 January 2019, shows various identifiable information * Congressman D.C. Letter, dated 5 August 2019, asking for a review of the applicant’s documents within the Army’s jurisdiction * Ms. V.B. Email Message to U.S. Army Pentagon, HQDA, OCLL, CLI, dated 5 August 2019, requesting for a review of the applicant’s documents submitted in reconsideration to upgrade his discharge 10. On 2 November 1992, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his petition for an upgrade of his discharge, determining that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable. 11. On 1 September 2009, the ABCMR denied his petition for an upgrade of his discharge, determining that the evidence did not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. 12. The applicant states his problems in his marriage resulted in him drinking alcohol and staying out at night, which led to his discipline issues. The Army handled his alcoholism by discharging him from the military. His record shows charges were preferred against him for one specification each of assault, AWOL, and breaking restriction. He served 1 year, 3 months, and 22 days of his 4 years contractual obligation. 13. The applicant requests an upgrade so that he may receive benefits. The ABCMR does not grant requests for upgrade of discharges solely for the purpose of making the applicant eligible for veterans' benefits. 14. In regards to the applicant's request for a personal appearance, Army Regulation 15-185, states an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the Board; however, the request for a hearing may be authorized by a panel of the Board or by the Director of ABCMR. 15. AR 635-200 states a Chapter 10 is a voluntary discharge request in-lieu of trial by court martial. 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. 16. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and service record 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 record and length of service, the frequency and nature of his misconduct, court-martial charges and the reason for his separation. The Board considered the applicant’s VA rating decision. The Board found insufficient evidence of in-service mitigation to overcome the misconduct and the applicant provided no evidence of post-service achievements or 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. The Board concurred with the corrections stated in the Administrative Note(s) below. 2. The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. 3. 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, except for the corrections stated in the Administrative Note(s) that follow, 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): A review of the applicant's record shows his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), for the period ending 11 May 1989, is missing important entries that may affect his eligibility for post-service benefits. As a result, amend the DD Form 214 by adding the following entries to item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized): * M-16 Rifle Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge * Hand Grenade Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel. a. An honorable discharge was a separation with honor and entitled 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 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. c. When a member is to be issued a discharge under other than honorable conditions, the convening authority will direct his immediate reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. d. A Chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service) 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. 2. 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. a. The guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. b. 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 the applicant. 3. AR 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR has the discretion to hold a hearing; applicants do not have a right to appear personally before the Board. The Director or the ABCMR may grant formal hearings whenever justice requires. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190009226 7 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190009226 1