IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 June 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100029952 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 an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) to a general discharge. 2. The applicant states he requested to be discharged from the service due to domestic violence in his home in Puerto Rico. His mother was going through a very difficult time and she couldn't count on anyone but him. He served his country honorably, he was a good Soldier looking to have a career in the Army, but his mother needed him for her safety. His mother blames herself for his not continuing in the Army. He would like his discharge upgraded so he can work for the government. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence to support his request. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (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. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 January 1978. He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty 13B (Cannon Crewman). He was then assigned to Battery A, 3d Battalion, 3d Field Artillery, Fort Sill, OK, until 5 October 1979 when he departed for assignment to Germany. 3. His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) shows in item 21 (Time Lost) that he was absent without leave (AWOL) from 9 November 1979 through 7 January 1980 (60 days). 4. The applicant's discharge processing documentation is not available. However, his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was administratively discharged on 19 March 1980 under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), for conduct triable by court-martial. He was issued a UOTHC discharge. He completed 2 years and 10 days of total active service. 5. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. 6. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 in effect at the time provided that a member who 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 at any time after court-martial charges were preferred. Commanders would ensure that an individual was not coerced into submitting such a request. Consulting counsel would advise the member concerning the elements of the offense or offenses charged, the type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of Veterans Administration benefits, and the possibility of prejudice in civilian life because of the characterization of such a discharge. A UOTHC discharge was normally considered appropriate. b. Paragraph 3-7b provides that 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. 7. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR. Paragraph 2-9 states that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge. His DD Form 214 shows he was administratively discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for conduct triable by court-martial. 2. The regulations governing the Board's operation require that the discharge process must be presumed to have been in accordance with applicable law and regulations unless the applicant can provide evidence to overcome that presumption. 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) AR20100015867 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100029952 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1