IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE: 11 April 2023

		DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220009006


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty) to show her under honorable conditions (general) 
discharge as honorable.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:

DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. 
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 while out processing she completed paperwork to have her 
discharge changed from under honorable conditions to honorable. She was told she 
would receive a new DD Form 214 with an honorable character of service. She is now 
requesting that DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 March 1990 for four years. Her 
military occupational specialty was 98H (Morse Interceptor).

4.  The applicant served in Korea from 3 January 1991 through 31 December 1991.

5.  The applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army on 30 September 1993, for three years 
in the grade of E-4.

6.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code 
of Military Justice at Fort Meade, MD on 9 August 1995, for a false claim of marriage to 
obtain Basic Allowance for Quarters at the with-dependent rate, in the amount of 
$459.00 on or about 30 December 1994, by using a fraudulent marriage certificate. Her 
punishment consisted of reduction to private first class/E-3, forfeiture of $567.00 pay for 
two months, and 45 days of extra duty.
7.  The applicant appealed the Article 15 punishment on 14 August 1995, stating she 
understood the evidence shown may have implied guilt; however, she did nothing 
deliberate to defraud the U.S. Government. She simply used bad judgment.

8.  The Article 15 Proceedings for the applicant memorandum, dated 22 August 1995, 
shows no recommended change in the imposed punishment. In the applicant’s 
executive officer’s opinion, the applicant knowingly and willingly defrauded the 
government for her own personal benefit. 

9.  A Report of Investigation, dated 27 August 1995, shows the applicant was 
investigated for fraud (larceny of government funds). In November 1994, the applicant 
submitted a fraudulent DA Form 3349 (Medical Profile) to her chain of command, 
indicating she was pregnant, then requested an early discharge and authorization to 
reside off post, based upon the fraudulent medical profile. 

10.  The Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 20 September 1995, shows the 
applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, was 
mentally responsible, and met retention requirements. The applicant was psychiatrically 
cleared for administrative action.

11.  The applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate 
separation actions against her on 27 September 1995, under the provisions of Army 
Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12c, by 
reason of misconduct-commission of a serious offense. The specific reason cited for the 
proposed action was the applicant's fraud against the U. S. Army by wrongfully filing for 
BAQ with a marriage certificate that was known to be fraudulent. The commander 
recommended she receive a general characterization of service.

12.  The applicant consulted with counsel on 28 September 1995 and acknowledged 
that she was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation and its effects, the 
rights available to her and the effect of a waiver of her rights. She did not elect to submit 
a statement in her own behalf. 

13.  The Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 1 November 1995, shows the 
applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, was 
mentally responsible and met retention requirements.

14.  The applicant's commander formally recommended the applicant's separation from 
service on 2 November 1995, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, 
Chapter 14, with a general discharge. The applicant's chain of command concurred with 
the recommendation.

15.  The separation authority approved the recommended discharge on 13 November 
1995 and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

16.  The applicant was discharged on 12 December 1995. Her DD Form 214 (Certificate 
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows she was discharged under the 
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c (1), by reason of misconduct. 
Her characterization of service was under honorable conditions (general). She 
completed 5 years, 9 months, and 5 days of net active service. She was awarded or 
authorized the: Army Commendation Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, National 
Defense Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, Sharpshooter 
Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship 
Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar. 

17.  Published guidance to the Boards for Correction of Military/Navy Records 
(BCM/NR) 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.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within 
the military record, the Board found that relief was partially warranted. The Board 
carefully considered the applicant’s 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 was discharged from active duty for misconduct - commission 
of a serious offense. Her service was characterized as under honorable conditions 
(general). She completed 5 years, 9 months, and 5 days of net active service. 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. However, because the applicant’s first period of enlistment 
was honorable, the Board determined his DD Form 214 should show her continuous 
honorable active service period information that is required for members who honorably 
served their first term of enlistment.




BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:X	:X	:X	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a 
recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all 
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected, by adding the 
following additional statements to block 18 (Remarks) of the DD Form 214: 

*	Continuous honorable active service from 8 March 1990 to 29 September 1993
*	Soldier has Completed First Full Term of service 

2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a 
portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of 
the application that pertains to upgrading the characterization of her discharge.

	 
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, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of 
military records must be filed within 3 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 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in 
the interest of justice to do so.

2.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations-Separation Documents) prescribed 
the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release 
from active military service or control of the Army. It established the standardized policy 
for the preparation of the DD Form 214. The DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's 
most recent period of continuous active service. The general instructions stated all 
available records would be used as a basis for preparation of the DD Form 214. The 
information entered thereon reflects the conditions as they existed at the time of 
separation. It states for Block 24 (Character of Service) characterization or description 
of service is determined by directives authorizing separation. Proper completion of this 
block is vital since it affects the Soldier’s eligibility for post-service benefits.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted 
personnel. The version in effect at the time provided that:

	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.  Chapter 14 of this regulation established policy and prescribed procedures for 
separating members for misconduct. Specific categories included minor disciplinary 
infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil 
authorities, desertion, or absences without leave. Action would be taken to separate a 
member for misconduct when it was clearly established that rehabilitation was 
impracticable or was unlikely to succeed. A under other than honorable conditions 
discharge was normally considered appropriate. However, the separation authority 
could direct a general discharge if merited by the Soldier's overall record.

4.  The Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) issued guidance to 
Service Discharge Review Boards and Service BCM/NRs on 25 July 2018, 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 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//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	AR20220009006


1
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1