| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Gale J. Thomas | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge. The applicant states that his discharge was inequitable because he agreed to an undesirable discharge while he was mentally ill and craving heroin, that prior to his service in Vietnam he was a model soldier, that he struggles with mental issues and Type II Diabetes possibly contracted from Agent Orange while in Vietnam. He also states that he was approved for medical benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs, Seattle Regional Office in 1999, but received a letter from the Boise Regional Office stopping his benefits.
PURPOSE: To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 29 May 1969, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of
3 years. He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 51L (Refrigeration Equipment Repairman). He served in Germany from 2 January 1970 to 16 July 1970, and in Vietnam from 13 September 1970 to 28 June 1971.
Between 4 September 1979 and 4 November 1971, he received three nonjudicial punishments under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave (AWOL) for a total of 22 days, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty, and for operating a vehicle on base without a valid driver’s license. His punishments included reduction, forfeiture, extra duty, and restriction.
In May 1972, the applicant was charged with being AWOL from 22 November 19971 until his apprehension by civil authorities on 25 April 1972, and from
17 May 1972 to 19 May 1972.
On 15 May 1972, the applicant was medically cleared for separation.
On 15 June 1972, a Neuropsychiatric Report determined that the applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, that he had a poor military attitude, and had no interest in remaining in the Army. He was very immature and unwilling to assume responsibility, and had no positive assets for life in the military.
On 21 June 1972, the applicant requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. He acknowledged that he had been advised of his rights and that he understood the ramifications of receiving a less than honorable discharge, including the fact that he could be denied some or all veterans’ benefits as a result of his discharge.
On 3 August 1972, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge under the above cited regulation and directed the issuance of an undesirable discharge certificate and his reduction to pay grade E-1.
On 24 August 1972, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) indicates he had
2 years, 8 months and 28 days of creditable service and 180 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.
There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
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. Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
DISCUSSION: The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 24 August 1972, the date the applicant was discharged. The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 24 August 1975.
The application is dated 26 November 2001 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.
DETERMINATION: The subject application was not submitted within the time required. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law. Prior to reaching this determination the Board looked at the applicant's entire file. It was only after all aspects of his case had been considered and it had been concluded that there was no basis to recommend a correction of his record that the Board considered the statute of limitations. Had the Board determined that an error or injustice existed it would have recommended relief in spite of the applicant's failure to submit his application within the three-year time limit.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__RVO__ __RWA__ __JTM __ CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION
| CASE ID | AR2002066311 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020620 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 142.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609924C070209
PURPOSE: To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: The applicant enlisted in the Army for three years on 30 March 1970, completed training and was assigned to a transportation company in Vietnam in August 1970. On 21 December 1971 the applicant consulted with counsel and requested discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010716C070208
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The statements submitted by the applicant from family and friends note the applicant was a good person without any troubles prior to going to Vietnam but was changed when he came back from Vietnam. The applicant has provided no evidence that he was in "detox" at the time of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076496C070215
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That the deceased former service member’s (FSM’s) undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. However, at the time of the applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608224C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicants military records show: He was enlisted in the Regular Army on his first term on 21 May 1969 for and served honorably for 1 year, 5 months, and 10 days, and he attained pay grade of E-4 on 20 May 1970. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088382C070403
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE : On 10 March 1972, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 with a UD. There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for review of his discharge under that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014572
On 12 June 1972, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The medical evidence of record, dated 24 May 1972, states that a complete review of physical and mental examinations failed to reveal any defects which would have contributed to the misconduct of the applicant.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009843
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The DD Form 214 issued to the FSM on 4 April 1973, the date of his discharge, confirms he was separated UOTHC under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Records show the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on should have been discovered on 4 April 1973, the date of the FSM's discharge, and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000203C070206
The applicant's commander was informed that on 28 July 1972, the applicant was released by the Vietnamese Immigration Police and he was returned over to the US Military Police. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to upgrade his discharge. As a result, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice to this Board expired on 27 April 1983.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004444C070206
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provides his self authored statement, Honorable Discharge Certificate, and Certificate of Military Service. These documents verify that the applicant received an honorable discharge for active service from 25 January 1968 through 19 June 1970.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100021144
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He states he believes his discharge for the period 14 October 1970 to 18 September 1972 should be upgraded because he was going through emotional and mental changes after Vietnam. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, stated an honorable discharge was a separation with honor.