IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:  30 September 2021

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20210005900


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  reconsideration of his previous request for an upgrade of his 
undesirable discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:  

*	DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the 
Armed Forces of the United States)
*	Psychiatric Evaluation, dated 14 January 2020

FACTS:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the 
previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of 
Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20170016683, dated 20 November 
2020.

2.  The applicant states he is formally seeking a change to his military records in regard
to his discharge. He is convinced his discharge was “improper/inequitable” because
there was only one isolated event in his 28-month tour of service with no other adverse
action. Therefore, the military made an error in his discharge designation.

3. The applicant provides new information which was not previously considered, in the 
form of a psychiatric evaluation, issued by the, Psychiatric Medication Management and 
Therapy Department, dated 14 January 2020.

4.  Review of his available service records show:

a.	a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 August 1955.

b. On 25 November 1955, he was convicted by a Special Court-Martial (SPCM) of
one specification of larceny. His sentence included forfeiture of $50 pay per month for
six months and confinement at hard labor for six months.

c. He went absent without leave (AWOL) from 4 May 1958 to 6 May 1958.
   d. On 7 July 1958, he was convicted by a SPCM of one specification of larceny. His 
sentence included forfeiture of $40 pay per month for four months and confinement at 
hard labor for four months.

   e. On 21 January 1959, he was convicted by a SPCM of one specification of a threat 
with a deadly weapon. His sentence included forfeiture of $40 pay per month for three 
months and confinement at hard labor for three months.

   f. On or about 1 April 1959, he received non-judicial punishment for failure to register 
his vehicle on post. His punishment was 14 days’ restriction and a verbal reprimand.

   g. On 28 April 1959, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate 
action to discharge him from the U.S. Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 
(AR) 635-208 (Personnel Separations – Discharge – Unfitness) by reason of unfitness. 
The basis for his recommendation was the applicant’s undesirable habits and traits of 
character. He advised the applicant of his rights. He had been advised by counsel of the 
basis for the contemplated action to separate him for unfitness under the provisions of 
AR 635-208.v He did not submit a statement on his own behalf. He acknowledged that:

   • he understood he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian
  life if a general discharge under honorable conditions was issued to him
   • he understood that in the event of the issuance of an undesirable discharge
      under conditions other than honorable, he might be ineligible for many or all
      benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws and he may
      encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life

h. On 15 May 1959, he was discharged from active duty under the provisions of
AR 635-208 by reason of unfitness. His character of service was undesirable. He
completed 3 years, 8 months and 20 days of active service.

5.  ABCMR Docket Number AR20170016683 was boarded on 20 November 2020. The 
Board denied the applicant’s request based upon the serious and criminal nature of the 
misconduct leading to the applicant’s separation. The Board concluded there was 
insufficient evidence of an error or injustice which would warrant a change to the 
applicant’s characterization of service.



6.  MEDICAL REVIEW:  The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor 
reviewed the supporting documents and the applicant’s military service records. On 
14 January 2020, he was evaluated by a psychiatric nurse practitioner. The applicant 
stated he hid the wallet of another service member resulting in time in the stockade and 
his difficulties in the military were interpersonal conflicts. However, his service record 
indicates two incidents of larceny, threat with a deadly weapon, and AWOL. The 
provider indicated the applicant likely had symptoms of Adjustment Disorder with mixed 
emotions and conduct. There is documentation to support a behavioral health diagnosis 
at the time of his discharge. There is no documentation to suggest he did not meet 
retention standards at the time of his discharge. Adjustment Disorder is not a mitigating 
factor for the misconduct that led to his discharge.


BOARD DISCUSSION:

The Board carefully considered the applicant's request, supporting documents, 
evidence in the records, a medical review, and published Department of Defense 
guidance for liberal consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered 
the applicant's statement, his record of service, the frequency and nature of his 
misconduct, and the reason for his separation. The Board considered the review and 
conclusions of the ARBA Medical Advisor. The Board found insufficient evidence of in-
service mitigating factors and concurred with the conclusion of the medical advising 
official regarding his misconduct not being mitigated by a behavioral health conditions.  
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.


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 that the overall merits of this case are 
insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number 
AR20170016683, dated 20 November 2020.

		  
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. Army Regulation(AR) 635-208 (Personnel Separations – Discharge -Unfitness), in 
effect at the time, set forth the policy and provided procedures and guidance for the 
prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unfit for further 
military service. It provided that individuals would be discharged by reason of unfitness 
with an undesirable discharge, unless the particular circumstances in a given case 
warrant a general or honorable discharge, when their records were characterized by 
one or more of the following: frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or 
military authorities, sexual perversion, drug addiction, an established pattern of shirking, 
and/or an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts.

2. AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), currently in effect, sets 
forth the basic policy 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 a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not
sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

	c. An under other than honorable discharge is an administrative separation from the
service under conditions other than honorable.

3.  AR 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military 
records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR begins 
its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity, which is 
that what the Army did was correct. 

     a. The ABCMR is not an investigative body and decides cases based on the 
evidence that is presented in the military records provided and the independent 
evidence submitted with the application. The applicant has the burden of proving an 
error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

	b. The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or request additional evidence
or opinions. Additionally, it states in paragraph 2-11 that applicants do not have a right
to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal
hearing whenever justice requires.

4. 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 (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 
courtmartial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which 
may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. 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 based 
on 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. 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)	 AR20210005900


4

ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1