| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his "under conditions other than honorable" discharge be upgraded. He states that he was not AWOL (absent without leave) for the amount of time recorded. He submits no evidence to support his request.
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:
He entered active duty in August 1967. Records available to the Board indicate he had two periods of AWOL between January and March 1970, while assigned to a unit in Vietnam.
In August 1970, following completion of his tour of duty in Vietnam, the applicant was again reported AWOL. He returned to military control in June 1971 and was placed in confinement. He was released from confinement on 16 July 1971 and assigned to a unit at Fort Hood, Texas. On 26 July 1971 he again departed AWOL and was dropped from the roles of the Army. He returned to military control on 18 October 1971 and was subsequently discharged "under conditions other than honorable" on 24 November 1971 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. Documents associated with the applicant's administrative separation were not in records available to the Board. The applicant's 1971 separation document indicates he had a total of 3 years and 4 days of creditable service and more than 400 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
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.
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.
In the absence of evidence to contrary the Board presumes regularity in the applicant's discharge proceedings. The Board notes that the lost time reflected on the applicant's 1971 discharge document was the result of both AWOL and confinement time, not just his periods of AWOL.
There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, which would serve as a basis to upgrade the character of his discharge.
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 November 1971, 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 November 1974.
The application is dated 5 March 2002 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 | AR2002070606 |
| 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 | CY2002 | 2002076790C070215
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. On 25 March 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board, in an unanimous opinion, denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. There is no evidence, nor...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 1997002268
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. A board of officers convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service because of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004803C070206
The applicant requests that his days of lost time be changed on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty). Item 44 (Time Lost Under 972, Title 10, United States Code and Subsequent to Normal Date ETS) on the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he was AWOL from 4 August 1970 to 5 August 1970. On 27 January 1972, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge to honorable.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061348C070421
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086214C070212
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant's request for discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002159C070205
Roland Venable | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant's separation document shows 5 months and 27 days of creditable service which would have included his initial 14 days of service between the date of his induction and his first period of AWOL, his approximately 2 months in confinement at Fort Riley between 1 October 1969 and 27 December 1969 and his second period of confinement following his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055025C070420
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078192C070215
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant has not presented and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9708825
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040006591C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge characterized as under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The commander advised the applicant of his right to have his case considered by a board officers; to appear in person before a board officers; to submit statements in his own behalf; to be represented by counsel; to waive any of these rights; and to withdraw any waiver of rights at any time prior to the date the discharge authority...