IN THE CASE OF:  

BOARD DATE:  22 July 2022

DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20210016132


APPLICANT’S REQUEST:  The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request 
to upgrade his under other than honorable conditions discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	Civilian medical records

FACTS:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records, as were summarized in the 
previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of 
Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20130017066, on 22 May 2014.

2.  The applicant states they told him he would be eligible for an upgrade after 
6 months, but he never applied. He requires this records correction now because he 
needs medical treatment of his service-incurred post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), 
and, unless the Board upgrades his character of service, he will remain ineligible. The 
applicant provides additional information and arguments in a self-authored statement:

	a.  The applicant discloses he had a “rough” childhood; his mother was strict and his 
father, who had served in the military, struggled with mental health issues. The 
applicant grew up with four other siblings, and his older brother and sister often cared 
for him and his two younger brothers. “When I was in elementary school, I was attacked 
and made to expose myself to the class while we were at recess. Later, I was 
kidnapped by my father, when I was about 8-9 years old with my cousin who had been 
staying with us at the time – he (the applicant’s father) took us and kept us at his home 
until the police came to make him release us and we were taken home. Lastly, when I 
was in high school (age 14), my mom shot a gun at me to stop me from moving out. 
She said I was too young to leave, and that she would shoot me to stop me if she had 
to; when I said that I was going anyway, she shot at me but, thankfully, missed.”

	b.  The applicant explains that he enlisted into the Army for a few reasons:  he 
always liked the military and thought of serving as a duty; his father and uncles had 
been in the military; and, while in high school, he got into some trouble, and he believed 
entering the Army would add structure to his life and keep him out of trouble. 

	c.  Once on active duty, he trained as a radio teletype operator, and during his 
advanced individual training (AIT), he finished in the top 10 of his group. After training, 
he returned to his U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) unit, but, on his arrival, he realized their 
communications section was a mess. Although he tried to explain that he was unable to 
correct all that was wrong, they nonetheless maintained their unrealistic expectations of 
him; that was when the applicant decided to join the Regular Army. 

	d.  Upon his entry on active duty, orders assigned him to a field artillery unit in 
Korea, and he remained there for about a year and a few months; he served as the 
radio teletype operator for the headquarters. During his tour, he witnessed some very 
traumatic events that continue to haunt him:

		(1)  One morning, as he returned to camp, he saw an American Soldier tied to a 
cross in the middle of a rice patty; someone had cut off the man’s genitals and sewn 
them into his mouth. The applicant told his commander, and the commander had the 
body retrieved; the applicant was very shaken by what he saw. 

		(2)  Later, he witnessed a lieutenant and a sergeant being hacked to death with 
machetes on ; they had always told him and the other Soldiers not to cross a blue at the 
risk of being arrested or shot, but nothing prepared the applicant for what occurred. 

		(3)  During artillery training, a gun battery accidently dropped a howitzer round on 
a village, killing and injuring several civilians; they told the applicant they intended to 
arrest and prosecute him because he had been the communications officer during the 
training exercise. 

		(4)  Someone falsely accused the applicant of burning down a woman’s home, 
and, to avoid prosecution, he had to leave the base in the back of an ambulance so that 
he could board a plane. 

		(5)  “Finally, it is worth mentioning that I was under significant stress due to fears 
of dying from Undo (sic, Ondol) (under-the-floor heating common in ); I had heard about 
Soldiers dying from carbon monoxide poisoning while sleeping, and it made me worry 
about ever going out staying anywhere else.” 

	e.  Following his assignment in Korea, the applicant transferred to a Joint Command 
in Florida.

		(1)  At his new station, the applicant began to experience headaches, insomnia, 
nightmares, and anger/emotional reactivity. He also found it difficult to maintain 
interpersonal relationships, he started to lose interest in activities he had once enjoyed, 
and he felt the need to be constantly on-guard and ready to defend himself. Additionally, 
he began acting in uncharacteristic ways, doing such things as, “writing frequent, 
extravagant, and confusing in hindsight bad checks that would bounce; getting in fights 
with family, friends, and other service members; and soliciting prostitutes. None of these 
behaviors were things that I had ever engaged in prior to experiencing the symptoms 
after returning from Korea, but they became frequent and unmanageable in the 
aftermath of my deployment.” 

		(2)  At one point, the applicant developed a fear of flying, and he told his 
sergeant major (SGM) that he no longer felt safe. The SGM said flying was a part of the 
applicant’s job and the applicant had to do it; when the applicant refused, they sent him 
to see a psychiatrist but, despite the applicant’s insistence to the contrary, the 
psychiatrist opined the applicant was able to perform his duties. The applicant notes he 
also tried talking to a staff sergeant, but when nothing was done, the applicant “let it go,” 
worrying that talking too much would result in being treated differently or incurring 
punishment for having spoken out about a problem. Another sergeant attempted to help 
the applicant, but by that time the applicant could no longer control his behavior.

		(3)  Ultimately, the Army separated the applicant in 1983, and this was due to 
several factors, but primarily because the applicant’s commanding officer learned the 
applicant had been writing dishonored checks. The applicant states he wrote those 
checks for a variety of often strange and excessive things, and he made no effort to 
hide what he was doing. Examples of the things he paid for by check included 
purchasing wicker furniture, making car payments, paying a woman’s rent, buying food 
and clothing for a homeless man, and procuring lavish champagne for his friends. In 
addition, some of his abnormal behaviors, such as the solicitation of prostitutes, got him 
in trouble with civilian law authority; as a result, and after his court-martial, the Army 
gave  him an under other than honorable conditions discharge and released him to a 
civil court to face charges.

	f.  The applicant’s transition back to civilian life was incredibly difficult and marred by 
several disrupting symptoms; his family relationships were severely damaged due to the 
applicant’s hostile, paranoid, and aggressive behaviors. In addition, the applicant 
engaged illegal activities that resulted in his arrest and incarceration during the 1980s 
and 1990s. He has a son from an earlier relationship, but their interactions have been 
strained, and the applicant sees his son struggling with anger management and 
domestic violence; the applicant comments that, “I am hurt by what I see as my part in 
the development (of his son’s behavior) over the years.”

	g.  In 1983, the applicant met his wife and they married in 1984; she is the best thing 
that has ever happened to him. His spouse is his best friend, closest supporter, and 
primary caregiver, and she has helped him to better manage his symptoms. The 
applicant provides examples of his erratic behavior following separation, and he 
attributes his actions to the trauma he experienced while in Korea. 

	h.  The applicant affirms he has worked many jobs after leaving the Army, and they 
were often dangerous or involved high risk. For example, he was a high-rise window 
washer, and he fixed concrete in sewer drains; he had a job on a flight line, and he 
worked in nightclubs. Most recently, he returned to his family’s hometown and worked at 
a packing house, but he had to stop 4 or 5 months later due to renal failure and 
hepatitis; his illness forced him to pursue disability. 

	i.  Immediately following his discharge, he sought treatment for his behavioral health 
issues, but nothing helped until he saw a provider in a Vet Center and licensed mental 
health professional in a local health center; both concluded the applicant suffered from 
PTSD. The applicant notes, “I am interested in continuing treatment as I’ve noticed that 
it really seems to help to talk about what happened to me. When I don’t go, I notice that 
I start to get irritable and nervous/jittery.” 

	j.  The applicant expresses regret for having written bad checks, “and for everything 
I did that caused me (to) look bad in my commanding officer’s eyes and those of my 
fellow Soldiers.” He points out that, with a less than honorable discharge, he cannot be 
buried with honors; he would like his five grandchildren to have pride in his military 
service and their family heritage. In addition, the applicant is currently on dialysis, and 
will likely have to continue that for the rest of his life; an upgrade would allow him to 
receive benefits and improve his chances for a kidney transplant. 

3.  The applicant provides civilian medical records, dated between December 2018 and 
July 2021, which show initial diagnoses of adjustment disorder and changing to PTSD, 
in 2019.

4.  The applicant's service records show:

	a.  On 3 November 1978, after obtaining his parent’s permission, the applicant 
enlisted into the USAR for 6 years at the age of 17. On 8 April 1979, upon completion of 
initial entry training and the award of military occupational specialty 05C (Radio 
Teletype Operator), the Army honorably released the applicant from active duty and 
returned him to his USAR unit. The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from 
Active Duty) indicates he completed 5 months and 6 days of net active-duty service; 
item 26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign 
Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) states, “None.” 

	b.  On 1 May 1979, the applicant requested release from the USAR to enlist into the 
Regular Army. On 22 May 1979, after securing his release from the USAR, and with his 
parent’s consent, the applicant enlisted into the Regular Army for 4 years; at his 
enlistment, the applicant held the rank/grade of private (PV2)/E-2 and he was 17 years 
old. Orders immediately assigned him to a field artillery unit in Korea, and he arrived at 
his unit, on 9 June 1979. 

	c.  On 17 October 1979, while still in Korea, the applicant accepted nonjudicial 
punishment (NJP), under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice 
(UCMJ) for wrongfully possessing marijuana; punishment included a suspended 
reduction to private (PV1/E-1). On 26 May 1980, the applicant completed his tour in 
Korea, and orders reassigned him to a joint command on MacDill Air Force Base in 
Florida; on 7 July 1980, the applicant arrived at his new unit. 

	d.  Effective 1 November 1981, the applicant’s command promoted him to sergeant 
(SGT)/E-5. On 6 December 1981, a U.S. Marine Corps brigadier general awarded the 
applicant a letter of commendation for the applicant’s superior duty performance while 
serving as a member of a Joint Task Force, which had deployed to Egypt, during the 
period 4 November to 12 December 1981. On 14 May 1982, Permanent Orders 
awarded the applicant the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 23 May 
1979 through 22 May 1982. 

	e.  On 23 September 1982, the applicant’s commander prepared a bar to 
reenlistment action against the applicant, citing six dishonored checks, totaling $875; a 
counseling statement pertaining to alleged leave statement falsification; and a civilian 
arrest for solicitation of prostitution and marijuana possession. On 13 October 1982, the 
U.S. Army Element commander approved the bar.

	f. On 28 October 1982, Captain (CPT) J__ R. C__, Investigating Officer, reported the 
results of his preliminary inquiry into misconduct allegations against the applicant. 

		(1) On 21 October 1982, CPT C__ obtained the cooperation of the 
Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Open Mess General Manager (Command Sergeant 
Major (CMSgt) ; CPT sought to question the four cashiers at the Open Mess who had 
cashed the applicant’s dishonored checks. Three of the four cashiers recognized their 
initials on the cashed checks, and each made sworn statements as to the procedures 
they followed when cashing checks; two of the cashiers affirmed they could identify the 
applicant if they saw him. CPT asked SMSgt to secure to actual checks written by the 
applicant for later use as evidence.

		(2)  CPT found working with the on-base credit union more difficult. He asked the 
credit union for copies of letters they had sent to the applicant regarding his dishonored 
checks, as well as copies of the applicant’s account statements for August and 
September 1982; the credit union’s legal advisor instructed the credit union to only 
release the information with a subpoena, due to privacy act concerns. 

	g.  On 4 November 1982, the applicant's leadership preferred court-martial charges 
against him for the following UCMJ violations:

		(1)  Article 123a (Uttering Worthless Checks with the Intent to Defraud and to 
obtain a Thing of Value), two specifications:

*	Between 26 September and 20 October 1982, the applicant uttered 
25 checks, totaling $1,915, and with the intent to defraud and to procure 
lawful currency
*	Between 11 and 14 October 1982, the applicant uttered two checks, totaling 
$112.35, for the purpose of renting a car

		(2)  Article 80 (Attempted Larceny), one specification:  On 28 October 1982, the 
applicant attempted to steal U.S. currency, of some value, from the NCO Open Mess.

	h.  On 16 December 1982, civilian authority arrested the applicant and placed him in 
a county jail, pending the disposition of charges. On 4 January 1983, the civilian 
authority released the applicant and returned him to military control so he could attend 
his court-martial.

	i.  On 7 January 1983, after consulting with counsel, the applicant voluntarily 
requested discharge in-lieu of trial by court-martial under chapter 10 (Discharge for the 
Good of the Service), Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted 
Personnel). In his request, he stated no one subjected him to coercion and counsel had 
advised him of the implications of his request; he further acknowledged he was guilty of 
the charges. He elected not to submit statements in his own behalf.

	j.  On 14 January 1983, the separation authority approved the applicant’s separation 
request and directed his under other than honorable conditions discharge; in addition, 
the separation authority ordered the applicant’s reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. 
On 17 January 1983, local civilian authority took custody of the applicant and placed 
him in civil confinement to serve a 6-month term. 

	k.  On 19 January 1983, orders discharged the applicant under other than honorable 
conditions; his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) 
shows he completed 3 years, 7 months, and 28 days of his 4-year enlistment contract. 
Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or 
Authorized) reflects the award of the Overseas Service Ribbon, Army Service Ribbon, 
NCO Professional Development Ribbon, and the Army Good Conduct Medal.

	l.  On 9 September 2013, the applicant petitioned the ABCMR, requesting an 
upgraded character of service; he argued that he needed the upgrade so he could 
obtain medical treatment at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). With his request, 
he submitted two letters of support, which characterized the applicant as a loving family 
man and a person of good character. On 22 May 2014, after considering the applicant’s 
application, documentary evidence, and service record, the Board voted to deny relief. 

5.  Clemency guidance to the Boards for Correction of Military/Navy Records (BCM/NR) 
does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in 
application of their equitable relief authority to ensure each case will be assessed on its 
own merits. In determining whether to grant relief 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. This includes consideration of changes in policy, whereby a service 
member under the same circumstances today would reasonably be expected to receive 
a more favorable outcome.

	a.  During the applicant's era of service, Soldiers charged with UCMJ violations, for 
which a punitive discharge was among the maximum punishments, could request 
separation under chapter 10, AR 635-200; such requests were voluntary and offered in-
lieu of trial by court-martial. 

		(1)  The Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM) then in effect stated the maximum 
punishment for violations of Article 123a (Uttering Worthless Checks with the Intent to 
Defraud and to obtain a Thing of Value) included a punitive discharge. 

		(2)  Regarding Article 80 (Attempts), the MCM stated persons found guilty of an 
attempt to commit any offense punishable under the UCMJ were subject to the same 
maximum punishment authorized for the offense attempted. The applicant attempted to 
steal U.S. currency, of some value, from the NCO Open Mess; a punitive discharge was 
among the maximum punishments for violations of Article 121 (Larceny of Property).

	b.  The ABCMR does not grant requests for upgraded characters of service solely to 
make someone eligible for Veterans' benefits; however, in reaching its determination, 
the Board can consider the applicant’s petition, his evidence and assertions, and his 
service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency guidance.

6.  Published guidance to the BCM/NRs clearly indicates that the guidance is not 
intended to interfere or impede on the Board's statutory independence. The Board will 
determine the relative weight of the action that led to the discharge and whether it 
supports relief or not. In reaching its determination, the Board shall consider the 
applicant's petition, available records and/or submitted documents in support of the 
petition.  

7.  MEDICAL REVIEW: 

The Army Review Board Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor reviewed the supporting 
documents and the applicant’s military service records. The Armed Forces Health 
Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) & Health Artifacts Image Solutions 
(HAIMS) was not in use during his time in service. His hardcopy military medical records 
were not available for review. Civilian treatment record dated 12 Dec 2018 indicates the 
applicant was treated for Adjustment Disorder with anxiety. Treatment noted dated 27 
Feb 2019 shows a diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with anxiety and depression. On 
15 Apr 2019, he reported witnessing multiple deaths while in the Army which led to his 
anxiety symptoms. He reported multiple prison sentences in the 80s and 90s for 
terroristic threats, assaults, and violation of probation. He receives social security 
disability for renal failure. He was diagnosed with PTSD. A review of JLV indicates the 
applicant has not been evaluated or treated in the VA system. He does not have a 
service connected disability rating. In accordance with the 3 Sep 2014 Secretary of 
Defense Liberal Guidance Memorandum and the 25 Aug 2017, Clarifying Guidance 
there is documentation to support a behavioral health diagnosis at the time of his 
discharge. PTSD is not a mitigating factor for 27 bad checks (over $2,000) nor 
attempting to steal U.S. currency.
    a.  Questions
(1)	Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the 
discharge? 
(a)	Yes
(2)	Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service?  
(a)	Yes
(3)	Does the condition experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
(a)	No
(4)	Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
(a)	No



BOARD DISCUSSION:

The Board carefully considered the applicants request, supporting documents, evidence 
in the records, a medical review and published DoD guidance for liberal consideration of 
discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant's statement, his 
record of service, the frequency and nature of his misconduct, and the reason for his 
separation. The Board considered the medical records and the review and conclusions 
of the reviewing official. The Board concurred with the medical reviewer finding 
insufficient evidence of in-service mitigating factors to overcome the misconduct. 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. 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, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient 
as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number 
AR20130017066, on 22 May 2014.


		 
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.
REFERENCES:

1.  AR 635-200, in effect at the time, prescribed policies and procedures for the 
administrative separation of enlisted personnel. 

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a (Honorable Discharge) stated an honorable discharge was a 
separation with honor. The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality 
of the Soldier's service generally met the standards of acceptable conduct and duty 
performance.
	b.  Paragraph 3-7b (General Discharge).  A general discharge was a separation 
under honorable conditions and applied to those Soldiers whose military record was 
satisfactory, but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

	c.  Chapter 10 applied to Soldiers who had committed an offense or offenses for 
which the punishment under the UCMJ included a punitive (i.e., bad conduct or 
dishonorable) discharge. Soldiers could voluntarily request discharge once charges had 
been preferred; commanders were responsible for ensuring such requests were 
personal decisions, made without coercion, and following being granted access to 
counsel. Commanders were to give the Soldier a reasonable amount of time to consult 
with counsel prior to making his/her decision. The Soldier made his/her request in 
writing, which certified he/she had been counseled, understood his/her rights, could 
receive an under other than honorable conditions character of service, and recognized 
the adverse nature of such a character of service. Consulting counsel was to sign the 
request as a witness.

2.  The Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, in effect at the time, showed the 
maximum punishments for violations of Article 86 (AWOL for more than 30 days) 
included a punitive discharge. 

3.  AR 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), in effect at the time, 
prescribed policies and procedures for enlisted promotions and reductions. Paragraph 
8-11 (Approved for Discharge from Service under Other Than Honorable Conditions) 
stated commanders could reduce Soldiers discharged under other than honorable 
conditions to the lowest enlisted grade.

4.  On 25?August 2017, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and 
Readiness issued clarifying guidance for the Secretary of Defense Directive to DRBs 
and BCM/NRs when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their 
discharges due in whole or in part to: mental health conditions, including PTSD; 
Traumatic Brain Injury; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Boards are to give liberal 
consideration to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is 
based in whole or in part to those conditions or experiences. The guidance further 
describes evidence sources and criteria and requires Boards to consider the conditions 
or experiences presented in evidence as potential mitigation for misconduct that led to 
the discharge.

5.  On 25?July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 
issued guidance to Military DRBs and 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.  

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20210016132


1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	AR20210016132


1