IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 July 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140018467 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration of his earlier request for retroactive pay and allowances based on his discharge upgrade to general under honorable conditions with reinstatement of his rank/pay grade to private/E-2 effective 14 March 1990. As new issues, he further requests: a. in effect, an upgrade of his general discharge under honorable conditions to honorable and b. correction of item 19b (Nearest Relative) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). 2. The applicant states he received an "honorable discharge" per the decision of the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). In addition, he was granted an increase in pay grade from E-1 to E-2 but he was never properly compensated. He was only compensated for the leave he accumulated instead of from the date his rank was originally reduced. 3. The applicant provides: a. an amended DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), dated 15 October 2014; b. his reissued DD Form 214; c. a letter from U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center, dated 15 September 1994; and d. a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), dated 10 September 2014. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 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 AR20110008655 on 27 October 2011. 2. Since the applicant did not provide any new evidence pertaining to his request for retroactive pay and allowances based on his discharge upgrade to general under honorable conditions with reinstatement of his rank/pay grade to private/ E-2 effective 14 March 1990, the portion of his request pertaining to reconsideration will not be discussed further in this Record of Proceedings. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 September 1979 and trained as a food service specialist. He remained on active duty through continuous reenlistments. He reenlisted for the last time on 5 May 1988 for a period of 4 years. 4. He received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on: * 25 May 1989 for being absent without leave * 25 July 1989 for failing to repair 5. His records are void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his final discharge action. However, his ADRB proceedings show: a. On 1 November 1989, he was notified of his pending separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, for misconduct (pattern of misconduct). b. On 2 November 1989, he consulted with counsel and waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon receiving a characterization of service no less favorable than under honorable conditions (general). He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. c. On 7 December 1989, the separation authority disapproved the applicant's request and referred his case to an administration separation board for consideration. d. On 2 February 1990, an administrative board of officers convened. The board recommended his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC). e. The separation authority approved the board's recommendation and directed the issuance of a discharge UOTHC. 6. On 20 March 1990, he was discharged UOTHC for misconduct (pattern of misconduct) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph  14-12c. He completed a total of 10 years, 5 months, and 8 days of creditable active service with 15 days of lost time. 7. Item 19b of his DD Form 214 shows his nearest relative at the time of his separation as C____ H____. 8. In July 1994, the ADRB upgraded his discharge to general under honorable conditions. 9. He provided: a. a letter from the U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center, dated 15 September 1994, informing him the ADRB upgraded his discharge UOTHC to general under honorable conditions; and b. a letter from the VA, dated 10 September 2014, informing him of his benefits from the VA. 10. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from active duty. a. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense. The regulation states that abuse of illegal drugs is serious misconduct. The issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. b. Paragraph 3-7a provides that 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. 11. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army. It established standardized policy for preparation of the DD Form 214 and stated the DD Form 214 was a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty. It provided a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. The instructions stated the mailing address after separation and nearest relative would be provided by the Soldier. For item 19a, this address must be a permanent address. For item 19b, the name and address of a relative should be someone who will know the Soldier's location and address at all times. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. Although the applicant implies he received an honorable discharge, the evidence of record shows he was discharged UOTHC in March 1990. 2. His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. 3. In July 1994, the ADRB upgraded his discharge UOTHC to general under honorable conditions. 4. Since his record of service during his last enlistment included two NJPs, his record of service was not so meritorious as to warrant a fully honorable discharge. 5. He requests correction of item 19b of his DD Form 214. However, the DD Form 214 is a snapshot in time and is a reflection of the applicant's record of active Army service at the time of his release from active duty. The evidence shows he reported his nearest relative as C____ H____ at the time of his discharge in 1990. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to base granting his request to amend item 19b of his DD Form 214. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ 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. ______________X___________ CHAIRPERSON 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140018467 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140018467 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1