IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE: 15 November 2023

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20230005426


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  in effect, upgrade of his under honorable conditions 
(general) discharge an honorable discharge.

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

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
*	Personal 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 regrets his actions that led to his discharge but feels that it 
does not reflect the true character of service in light of his earlier honorable period of 
service.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 January 1979 and he completed 
training with award of the military occupational specialty 55B (Ammunition Specialist). 

4.  On 22 July 1981, he reenlisted for 4 years at grade/pay grade specialist/E-4. The 
highest grade he held was E-4.

4.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP), under the provisions of 
Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), on the following dates for the 
indicated offenses:

*	company grade NJP,19 January 1984, for failure to go to his appointed place of 
duty on 11 January 1984; for being absent without leave from 0730 hours, 
12 January 1984 until 0730 hours 13 January 1984; his punishment included 
forfeiture and reduction to E-3; his appeal to higher authority was denied
*	field grade NJP, 12 April 1984, for violation of a general regulation by wrongful 
possession of a switch blade knife; violation of a general regulation by 
possessing drug abuse paraphernalia; wrongful possession ground flares; his 
punishment included forfeiture of pay and reduction to E-1; he did not appeal

5.  The applicant received a Letter of Reprimand on 24 July 1984 for operating a motor 
vehicle while intoxicated (DWI) on 12 April 1984.

6.  The applicant's records contain report of investigation prepared by the Military Police 
and the Criminal Investigative Division on charges of a second DWI, larceny (from a 
fellow Soldier), and possession of prohibited items, wrongful possession of hashish, and 
wrongful possession of pyrotechnics. The available records do not include the final 
actions on these charges. The investigating officer determined there was sufficient 
evidence to title the applicant for larceny and burglary.

7.  Summary Court-Martial Order Number 3, issued by Headquarters, First Forward 
Support Battalion, 3rd Infantry Division on 11 May 1984, shows the applicant was found 
guilty of a DWI and two specifications of breaking restriction on or about 1610 hours, 
26 April 1984 and on or about 2000 hours, 26 April 1984. His sentence included 
forfeiture of $397.00 and confinement for 30 days. The record of trial was reviewed and 
the findings and the sentence were approved on 31 May 1984.

8.  On 19 October 1984, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of 
his recommendation to initiate separation actions under Army Regulation 635-200 
(Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 13 for unsatisfactory 
performance.

9.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel on 15 October 1984. He was advised of 
the basis for the contemplated discharge, the possible effects of an under honorable 
conditions discharge, and the procedures and rights that were available to him. The 
applicant waived all of his administrate rights and elected not to submit a statement in 
his own behalf. He understood he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in 
civilian life if a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service were 
issued to him.

10.  The applicant's immediate commander formally recommended separation from 
service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory 
performance on 26 October 1984. 

11.  A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 30 October 1984 , 
shows the applicant had no abnormalities in behavior, level of orientation, mood, 
thinking process, thought content, or memory. He was determined to be mentally 
capable to understand and participate in the proceedings deemed appropriate by 
command.

12.  The appropriate authority approved the discharge recommendation on 1 November 
1984 and directed he be issued a general discharge.

13.  The applicant was discharged on 19 November 1984, in the pay grade of E-1. His 
DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-
200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with character of service of under 
honorable conditions (general), a Separation Code of JHJ, and Reentry Codes of 3, 3B, 
and 3C. He was credited with 5 years, 8 months, and 26 days of net active service and 
had 31 days of lost time from 11 May 1984 to 11 June 1984.

14.  On 30 January 1997, in Docket Number AD-95-00997, the Army Discharge Review 
Board determined his discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny his 
requested relief for an upgrade.

15.  In determining whether to grant relief the Boards for Correction of Military/Navy 
Records (BCM/NR) 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.	After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found
within the military record, the Board found that partial relief was 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 determined there is 
insufficient evidence of in-service mitigating factors for the misconduct to weigh a 
clemency determination.  The applicant provided no post service achievements or 
character letters of support to weigh a clemency determination. 

2.  The applicant was discharged for unsatisfactory performance and was provided an 
under honorable conditions (General) 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. However, the Board determined the applicant had a prior 
period of honorable service which is not currently reflected on his DD Form 214 and 
recommended that change be completed to more accurately show his period of 
honorable service by granting a partial upgrade.


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 amending 
the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period ending 19 November 1984 by adding the 
following entries to item 18 (Remarks):   

*	SOLDIER HAS COMPLETED FIRST FULL TERM OF SERVICE
*	CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 790122 UNTIL 810721 

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 applicant’s under honorable conditions 
(general) discharge an honorable 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.
ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S):  N/A


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 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.  A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. 
When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not 
sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under 
honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation 
specifically allows such characterization.

	c.  Chapter 13 provides that a Soldier may be separated when it is determined that 
he/she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory performance 
when in the commander's judgment; the Soldier will not develop sufficiently to 
participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier; the 
seriousness of the circumstances is such that the Soldier's retention will have an 
adverse impact on military discipline, good order, and morale; the Soldier will likely be a 
disruptive influence in duty assignments; the circumstances forming the basis for 
initiation of separation proceedings will likely continue or recur; the Soldier's ability to 
perform duties effectively is unlikely; and/or the Soldier's potential for advancement or 
leadership is unlikely.

3.  The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to 
Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records 
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.)	AR20230005426


1
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1