IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE: 9 November 2023

		DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230004284


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions 
(UOTHC) discharge to under honorable conditions (general).

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

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	Self-Authored Statement

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 is a patriot and was proud to serve. He served honorably in 
the Army National Guard (ARNG) for four years. His company at Fort Ord, CA, had 12 
to 15 men, including himself, go absent without leave (AWOL) due to mistreatment. His 
leadership knew nothing about their men or military history and could care less. In 
retrospect, all the cancelled weekends, extra physical training, competition between the 
men instead of teamwork, and ignorance of leadership was mentally too much. It was 
obviously felt throughout the unit. He learned while out processing that his unit was to 
be investigated.

3.  Having prior honorable enlisted service in the ARNG, the applicant enlisted in the 
Regular Army on 6 January 1987 for three years. His military occupational specialty was 
13B (Cannon Crewman).

4.  The applicant’s DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows in item 35 
(Record of Assignments), he was AWOL on 1 September 1987, and dropped from the 
rolls on 1 October 1987. He surrendered to authorities and was returned to military 
control on 6 October 1987.

5.  Court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant on 16 October 1987 for 
violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). His DD Form 458 (Charge 
Sheet) shows he was charged with AWOL from on or about 1 September 1987 until on 
or about 6 October 1987.

6.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel on 16 October 1987 and was advised of 
the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial; the maximum permissible 
punishment authorized under the UCMJ; the possible effects of a UOTHC discharge; 
the procedures and rights that were available to him.

	a.  After consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge 
under the provision of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted 
Personnel), Chapter 10, for the good of the service-in lieu of trial by court-martial. He 
further acknowledged he understood that if his discharge request was approved, he 
could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, he could be ineligible for many or all 
benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, and he could be deprived of his 
rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws and he may expect 
to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an UOTHC discharge.

	b.  He elected not to submit statements in his own behalf.

7.  The applicant’s commander recommended approval of his request for discharge in 
lieu of trial by court martial on 9 November 1987. The commander noted, in his opinion, 
the applicant was not motivated for continued service and would not respond to either 
counseling or rehabilitation and recommended he receive an UOTHC discharge. 

8.  The separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge for the good 
of the service on 9 December 1987, and directed the applicant's reduction to the lowest 
enlisted grade with issuance of a DD Form 794A (UOTHC Discharge Certificate).

9.  Orders 063-86, Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center, Fort Dix, NJ, amended his 
social security number on Orders 063-86 (separation orders).

10.  The applicant was discharged on 11 March 1988. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged under the provisions 
of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. 
His service was characterized as UOTHC. He completed 1 year, 1 month, and 14 days 
of net active service. He lost time from 1 September 1987 to 5 October 1987. He was 
awarded or authorized the Army Service Ribbon and Army Achievement Medal.

11.  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 Chapter 10. Such discharges 
are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

12.  In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition, 
arguments and assertions, and service record in accordance with the published equity, 
injustice, or clemency guidance. 


BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  The Board carefully considered the applicant's request, evidence in the records, and 
published Department of Defense guidance for consideration of discharge upgrade 
requests. The Board considered the applicant's statement (circumstances regarding the 
period of AWOL), his record of service, his bar to reenlistment, the frequency and 
nature of his misconduct, the reason for his separation, and whether to apply clemency. 

2.  The Board found the applicant’s explanation of the reason for going AWOL and the 
absence of any additional misconduct in his service records sufficient in support of a 
clemency determination. Based on a preponderance of the evidence, the Board 
determined the applicant’s character of service should be changed to under honorable 
conditions (general). The Board noted that because the basis for his reduction to the 
lowest enlisted pay grade was the original character of service, this correction will entail 
restoration of his grade to E-2.

BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:X	:X	:X	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION


?
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a 
recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of 
the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by reissuing his DD Form 
214 for the period ending 11 March 1988 to show his character of service as under 
honorable conditions (general) and to show he held the rank/grade of private 2/E-2 with 
an effective date of pay grade of 26 September 1986.
	 
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.  AR 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 Soldiers whose military record is satisfactory but not 
sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

	c.  Chapter 10 provided 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, a UOTHC discharge was normally considered appropriate. 

3.  The Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) issued guidance to 
Service Discharge Review Boards and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval 
Records (BCM/NR) on 25 July 2018 [Wilkie Memorandum], 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)	AR20230004284


1
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1