ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


IN THE CASE OF: 
BOARD DATE:  8 November 2019
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190011195


APPLICANT REQUESTS: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be 
upgraded to an honorable 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 3 July 2019
*	DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), for the 
period ending 23 May 1986

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 desires to apply for medical benefits related to a motor pool 
accident that was incurred while he was on active duty, causing lower back pain and 
other medical problems.

3.	The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 June 1982. He completed training 
as a combat engineer.

4.	The applicant was released from active duty on 23 May 1986 at the completion of his 
required service. He was issued a DD Form 214 that shows he was credited with 
completing three years and 11 months of net active service this period and his service 
was characterized as honorable.

5.	The applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army on 7 January 1987. He reenlisted in 
the Regular Army on 12 May 1989.  He attained the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5.

6.	The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment on 19 March 1990, under the 
provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for wrongfully



using some amount of marijuana, between on or about 6 January 1990 and 6 February 
1990.

7.	The applicant's commander notified the applicant that he was initiating actions to 
separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel 
Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12(c), for misconduct – illegal abuse 
of drugs.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification on 5 April 1990.

8.	The applicant was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation actions for 
misconduct, the rights available to him, and the effect of any action taken by him in 
waiving his rights. He consulted with counsel and waived his right to consideration of 
his case by a board of officers. He made an election to submit a statement in his own 
behalf; however, the statement is not available for review.

9.	The applicant's commander formally recommended his separation on 9 April 1990, 
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12(c). The separation 
authority approved the recommended separation on 24 April 1990, under the provisions 
of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12(c), and directed the issuance of a
DD Form 257A (General Discharge Certificate).

10.	The applicant was discharged on 14 May 1990, under the provisions of Army 
Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct – abuse of illegal drugs. His 
DD Form 214 confirms his service was characterized as under honorable conditions.

11.	The Board should consider the applicant's provided statement in accordance with 
the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After review of the application and all evidence, aside from the administrative 
correction below the signature block, the Board determined there is insufficient 
evidence to grant relief. The board applied Office of the Secretary of Defense 
standards for consideration of discharge upgrade requests to the complete evidentiary 
record, including the applicant’s statement and found insufficient evidence of error, 
injustice, or inequity; the applicant was a noncommissioned officer at the time of the 
misconduct, as such, he had adequate training and experience necessary to avoid 
conducting misconduct and was entrusted to set the example for his Soldiers to 
emulate. Furthermore, there is insufficient evidence of medical conditions or post 
service honorable conduct or letters of reference that might have mitigated the 
misconduct or support a clemency determination.  Therefore, 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:

Aside from the administrative below the signature block, 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.


1/15/2020

 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):

A review of the applicant's record shows his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty), for the period ending 14 May 1990, 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 entry to item 18 (Remarks):
*	SOLDIER HAS COMPLETED FIRST FULL TERM OF SERVICE
*	CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 870107 UNTIL 890511






REFERENCES:

1.	Title 10, U.S. Code, 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.	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.

   c.	Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members 
for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions (a pattern of 
misconduct consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions), a pattern of 
misconduct (consisting of discreditable involvement with civil or military authorities or 
conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline), commission of a serious offense 
(including drug abuse), and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to 
separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is 
impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. An under other than honorable conditions 
discharge is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, 
the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the 
Soldier's overall record.

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.

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//