IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE:  28 October 2022

		DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220003215


APPLICANT REQUESTS: correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from 
Active Duty) by:

*	upgrading his undesirable discharge (UD) to an under honorable conditions 
(general) discharge
*	correction of his service dates
*	correction of his date of birth 

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:
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, 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 enlisted at age 16 and was given a "BDC" for alleged drug 
use. His initial enlistment was incorrect as his date of birth and age were not accurate.  
He was 18 when the allegations of drug use were made, and he was given the choice of 
the brig or discharge. At the time he didn't realize the affect the discharge would make. 

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 October 1972 for 3 years. His DD 
Form 4 (Enlistment Contract), and allied documents, show his date of birth as 

4.  He held the military occupational specialty 71B (Clerk Typist). The highest 
rank/grade he held was private first class/E-3.

5.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) which was created upon his entry on 
active duty also listed his DOB 

6.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 of the Uniform 
Code of Military Justice on 4 December 1973 for possession of marijuana. His 
punishment included a reduction to private/E-2. 

7.  His record contains an endorsement to memorandum, Subject: Bar to Reenlistment. 
It states the bar to reenlistment is approved and that a signed copy would be placed in 
the individuals official record and would remain a permanent part of the 201 File. The 
remark "Not recommend for further service" will be entered in the remarks section of the 
DA Form 20.

8.  The complete facts and circumstance surrounding the applicant's discharge are not 
available. The applicant's discharge packet is not filed in the official military personnel 
file (OMPF). Due to the lack of evidence the specific circumstance(s) that led to his 
discharge are not available to be determined. 

9.  His DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) shows he was discharged 
on 14 December 1974 under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 
(Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-
martial, with a characterization of service of under conditions other than honorable. He 
had 2 years, 2 months, and 4 days of net active service. His separation code is KFS (In 
Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial). He was issued a DD Form 258A (Undesirable Discharge 
Certificate). His DD Form 214 lists his DOB as. He was awarded or authorized: 

*	National Defense Service Medal
*	Marksman Marksmanship Badge with Rifle Bar

10.  There is no indication he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for review of 
his discharge processing within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. 

11.  The issuance of a discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, 
required the applicant to have voluntarily, willingly, and in writing requested discharge in 
lieu of trial by court-martial. It is presumed that all requirements of law and regulation 
were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation 
process. The applicant has provided no information that would indicate the contrary. 
Further, it is presumed that the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects his overall 
record of service.

12.  The applicant was charged due to the commission of an offense punishable under 
the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. Subsequent to being charged, he consulted with 
counsel and requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, 
Chapter 10. Such discharges are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by 
court-martial.
13.  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.  

BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  The Board carefully considered the applicants request, supporting documents, 
evidence in the records, and published DoD guidance for liberal consideration of 
discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant's statement, the 
applicant's record of service, the frequency and nature of the applicant's misconduct 
and the reason for separation. The applicant’s separation packet is not available for 
review. However, other evidence shows he was charged with commission of an offense 
punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. He presumably consulted with 
counsel and requested discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10.  
Such discharges are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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.

2.  The Board agreed that there was insufficient evidence to change the date of birth 
shown on the DD Form 214. There is no evidence the applicant used the requested 
date of birth during his military service. The Army has an interest in maintaining the 
integrity of its records for historical purposes. The information in those records must 
reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were 
created, unless there is sufficient evidence that shows a material error or injustice. The 
Board did not find an error or an injustice.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 October 1972, and he was 
separated on 14 December 1974. He completed 2 years, 2 months, and 4 days of 
active service. The Board found no evidence he completed any other period of active 
service that warrants a correction to his total service. 


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.

		  

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.  Title 10, United States Code (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 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 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the 
separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers at the time of retirement, 
discharge, or release from active duty service or control of the Active Army.  It 
established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The 
general instructions stated all available records would be used as a basis for 
preparation of the DD Form 214.  The specific instructions for item 4 stated to verify the 
accuracy with the DOB of record.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, as the in effect, sets forth the basic authority for the 
separation of enlisted personnel. It provides:

	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 Soldiers whose military record is satisfactory but not 
sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

   c.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provided, in pertinent part, that a member who had 
committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a 
punitive discharge, could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in 
lieu of trial by court-martial. The request could be submitted at any time after charges 
had been preferred and must have included the individual's admission of guilt. Although 
an honorable or general discharge was authorized, an under other than honorable 
conditions discharge was normally considered appropriate. At the time of the applicant's 
separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge 
certificate.

4.  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)	 AR20220003215


1

ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1