IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE: 26 July 2026

		DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230000141


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions 
discharge to an honorable.

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

*	DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of 
the United States)
*	DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty), 7 February 1979
*	Commercial Vehicle Group Layoff Notification, 15 January 2009	
*	Employment Data Report, 19 August 2022
*	Criminal Record Search, 23 August 2022
*	Letters of Support (2)
*	Letter from the Applicant, 30 August 2022

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, he has been a good citizen since his discharge. He was 
unaware that he was able to apply for an upgrade of his discharge. Alcoholism was the 
cause of his discharge, and he has been sober for over 30 years now. He has been 
married for over 25 years, raised four children (3 of which are stepchildren), and have 
nine grandchildren. He states, this is a matter of pride for him to be able to show his 
children and grandchildren that he is an honorably discharged veteran. This would also 
increase their pride in him. He raised successful members of society. His stepson 
served in the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) because he wanted to see what 
military life was like, and he is currently an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) with 
the Fire Department  (FD). His stepdaughter is a court stenographer in , and his other 
stepdaughter is a schoolteacher for the public school system.

3.  The applicant provides the following supporting documentation:

	a.  A letter from the Commercial Vehicle Group (CVG), dated 15 January 2009, 
which states due to production volume decreases and shutdowns his position was 
eliminated and he was placed on indefinite layoff, effective 19 January 2009. 

	b.  An employment data report dated 19 August 2022, which verifies his employment 
status and pay with Lowe’s for the last 13 years and 3 months. 

	c.  Criminal Record Search with the state of, dated 23 August 2022, which certifies 
that the applicant has no criminal records or infractions. 

	d.  The applicant provides two letters of support, which state they have known him 
for over 20 years. The letters all state that he is an amazing husband and father. He is 
gainfully employed, been sober for over 25 years, a leader in his bowling league, coach 
for the youth bowling league, a member of the men’s softball league, and always willing 
to lend a helping hand to assist others. 

	e.  A letter to the Board dated 30 August 2022, which states:

		1)  He is asking the Board to upgrade his military discharge from a general 
discharge to an honorable discharge. It states during his military career he started 
drinking heavily and was passed out in bed and missed formation twice. He received 
two Article 15s and after the second one he was discharged from the Army. He states 
he has never been arrested and he stopped drinking on 29 February 1992. He is still 
sober to this day; 30 years later. 

		2)  He met his wife and shortly thereafter they got married. His wife had three 
children, whom he raised as his own, and she gave birth to their daughter. He is also 
raising one of his granddaughters because his daughter works during the night. 

		3)  He has been working at Lowe’s Corporation for 13 years. Prior to working at 
Lowe’s, he worked for Corporation for 5 years, before being laid off. Before that he 
worked at for 5 years, before being laid off. Through the years he has been a bowling 
coach and an umpire for the youth adult softball/baseball league. 

4.  A review of the applicant’s service records shows:

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 September 1976.

	b.  He received informal counseling’s for the following:

*	28 June 1978, for his uniform not meeting the standard set by the platoon 
sergeant on three separate occasions. 
*	22 August 1978, for performing all assigned tasks and military occupational 
specialty (MOS) related jobs in a highly commendable manner, and for his 
outstanding enthusiasm and knowledge. The only great downfall was his 
personal appearance and area. 
*	1 November 1978, his appearance and performance of duty was far below 
what was expected of him, and his uniform needed a great deal of 
improvement. He had to be told when to get a haircut. 
*	12 December 1978, for failing to assist specialist (SPC) with cleaning of the 
office. After 0730 formation the applicant went to his room to sleep. When 
asked why he was not in the office the applicant said, “I’m tired, what else can 
I say?”

	c.  On 1 November 1978, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) 
under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failing to go at the time 
prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: unit formation, on or about 0730,
31 October 1978. His punishment consisted of reduction to PV2/E-2, 14 days of extra 
duty, 14 days restriction to place of duty, and forfeiture of $50.00 per month for a period 
of one month. 

	d.  A Record of Formal Counseling, dated 19 December 1978, shows the applicant 
failed to report to his proper place of duty, to wit the 6th platoon, 275th Engineer 
Company. At approximately 0820, the platoon sergeant had to get him out of bed, which 
had happened on numerous occasions since his arrival to the platoon. He was informed 
that he was being recommended for disciplinary action and possible elimination from 
the service. 

	e.  On 9 January 1979, the applicant’s immediate commander notified him of his 
intent to initiate separation actions against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 
(AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 13-4(c), by 
reason of unsuitability, and advised the applicant of his rights. 

	f.  After consulting with legal counsel, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment 
(NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 10 January 1979, 
for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: unit 
formation, on or about 0730,19 December 1978. His punishment consisted of forfeiture 
of $100.00 per month for one month, 21 days of extra duty, 21 days restriction to the 
barracks, and reduction to PV1/E-1. 

	g.  On 17 January 1979, the applicant acknowledged notification of the proposed 
separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 13-4(c), and its effects; of 
the rights available to him. He acknowledged that he was provided the opportunity to 
consult with legal counsel. He waived consideration of his case by a board of officers. 
He waived a personal appearance before a board of officers. He elected to submit 
statements in his own behalf. He waived representation by counsel. He understood he 
may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge under 
honorable conditions was issued to him. He further understood that he may only receive 
a discharge under honorable conditions since he was being recommended for 
separation for unsuitability. He understood he may, up until the date the discharge 
authority directs or approves the discharge, withdraw the waiver of his rights and 
request that a board of officers hear his case. 

	h.  On 23 January 1979, the applicant provided a statement in his own behalf. He 
stated, he did not wish to challenge the alleged basis of the discharge. He 
acknowledged that he was apparently unable to adapt to the unique demands of military 
life. However, he did not believe the character of his service had been such that he 
should not be awarded an honorable discharge. He referenced the counseling he 
received on 22 August 1978, which stated his performance of assigned tasks and MOS 
related jobs were highly commendable. What the platoon sergeant faulted him for was 
his inability to keep his personal appearance and area up to the high standards of a 
special unit. There were no allegations that he was disrespectful, insubordinate or a 
troublemaker. He submitted that his faults stemmed from his inability to adapt to the 
military environment and had not been a detriment to the unit. He ended with stating 
that he requested that he be granted an honorable discharge. 

	i.  A report of medical examination and a report of medical history were completed 
on 23 January 1979. It was determined that the applicant met retention standards and 
was cleared for administrative separation. 

	j.  On 23 January 1979, the acting commander recommended approval of the 
separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 13-4(c), unsuitability. 
Discharge was specifically recommended for unsuitability because of character and 
behavior disorders, apathy (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitudes, and inability 
to expend effort constructively. A psychiatric examination was not required. 

	k.  On 25 January 1979, the separation authority approved the discharge and 
directed the applicant be issued an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.

	l.  The applicant was discharged on 7 February 1979. His DD Form 214 shows he 
was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 13-4(c), and his service 
was characterized as under honorable conditions. He completed 2 years and 5 months 
of net active service during the period covered. 




BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found 
within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board 
carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support 
of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy 
and regulation, and published Department of Defense guidance for liberal and clemency 
determinations requests for upgrade of his characterization of service.  Upon review of 
the applicant’s petition and available military records, the Board found insufficient 
evidence of in-service mitigating factors to overcome the misconduct. The Board noted 
the applicant’s exemplary post service achievements and character letters of support 
from community leaders and peers who attested to his honorable character. The Board 
applauds your post service contributions to the community. 

2.  However, the applicant was discharged for unsuitability and was provided an under 
honorable conditions9gneral0 characterization of service. The Board agreed that the 
applicant's discharge characterization is warranted as he did not meet the standards of 
acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel to receive an 
Honorable discharge. Therefore, the Board denied relief.


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, 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 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), in effect at 
the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 

	a.  Chapter 13 provided procedures and guidance for eliminating enlisted personnel 
found to be unfit or unsuitable for further military service. Paragraph 13-4c stated, 
Commander exercising special court-martial jurisdiction are authorized to convene 
boards of officers for unsuitability and to order separation. Commanders will ensure that 
before taking separation action against an individual under the provisions of this 
chapter, adequate counseling and rehabilitation measures have been taken. An 
individual is subject to separation under the provisions of this chapter for unsuitability 
when one or more of the following conditions exist:

		1)  Inaptitude – applicable to persons who are best described as inept, due to 
lack of general adaptability, want of readiness of skill, unhandiness, or inability to learn.

		2)  Character and behavior disorders – as determined by medical authority, 
character and behavior disorders and disorders of intelligence as suggested by various 
symptoms as enuresis or somnambulism, when such disorders are chronic and 
recalcitrant to attempts at rehabilitation and interfere with the servicemember’s ability to 
adequately perform his duties. 

		3)  Apathy – lack of appropriate interest, defective attitudes, and inability to 
expend effort constructively. 

		4)  Alcoholism – unsuitability by reason of chronic alcoholism may develop in 
persons who have previously rendered many years of adequate service. Personnel will 
be separated for unsuitability only if the major reason for separation is noneffective duty 
performance due to failure to cooperate with or succeed in an alcohol rehabilitation 
program. 

		5)  Homosexuality – homosexual tendencies, desires, or interest but without 
overt homosexual acts. 

	b.  An honorable discharge is a separation with honor. Issuance of an honorable 
discharge certificate is predicated upon proper military behavior and proficient 
performance of duty during the member's current enlistment or period of obligated 
service with due consideration for the member's age, length of service, grade, and 
general aptitude. Where a member has served faithfully and performed to the best of his 
ability and there is no derogatory information in his military record, he should be 
furnished an honorable discharge certificate. 

	c.  A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. It 
is issued to a member whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently 
meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

3.  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. 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. This guidance 
does not mandate relief but provides standards and principles to guide Boards in 
application of their equitable relief authority. 

	a.  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)	AR20230000141


1
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1