| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. G. E. Vandenberg | Analyst |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Curtis L. Greenway | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald J. Weaver | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded. He states that he is proud to be an American as his rational for requesting a waiver of the statute of limitations.
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 that:
The applicant entered active duty on 2 May 1968. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training.
The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for two periods of being absent without leave (AWOL), 31 May through 12 June 1968 and 15 July through 5 August 1968.
On 2 June 1969, a special court-martial found him guilty of three periods of AWOL, 3 through 10 September 1968, 13 September through 10 October 1968, and 14 October 1968 through 25 March 1969. The applicant escaped from confinement to go AWOL for the third period adjudged by this court-martial.
The applicant went AWOL a sixth time on 20 July 1969 and remained absent until 10 February 1970.
Although the applicant's complete discharge packet is not of record, the record shows that on 11 March 1970, after consulting with counsel and being advised of his rights and options, the applicant submitted a formal request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200, chapter 10. He acknowledged he had been advised of and understood his rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge which would deprive him of many or all of his benefits as a veteran, that he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received an UOTHC discharge, and that there is no automatic upgrading or review of a less than honorable discharge.
On 25 March 1970, the discharge authorities approved the request for discharge under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 and directed that the applicant be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade (E-1) and receive an Undesirable Discharge.
The applicant was discharged on 1 April 1970 with an Undesirable Discharge. He had only 3 months and 19 days of creditable service with 590 days lost due to AWOL or confinement.
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.
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. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable 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. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (AR 15-185, paragraph 8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to the ABCMR should commence on the date of final denial by the ADRB. In complying with this decision, the Board has adopted the broader policy of calculating the 3-year time limit from the date of exhaustion in any case where a lower level administrative remedy is utilized. The Board will continue to excuse any failure to timely file when it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
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 1 April 1970, the date of discharge. The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 1 April 1973.
The application is dated 18 May 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
__MHM__ __CLG__ __RJW __ CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION
| CASE ID | AR2002074798 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030204 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19700401 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, CH10. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084677C070212
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: In effect, that his undesirable discharge be corrected to show that he was discharged by reason of disability and that his discharge be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005705
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD), characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC), be upgraded. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show, to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise appear, that the record is in error or unjust. _____Jeffrey C. Redmann____ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070005705 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 20070920 TYPE OF DISCHARGE UD DATE OF...
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 | CY2001 | 2001059000C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Army Regulation 635-40 provides that a member who is charged with an offense for which he could be dismissed or given a punitive discharge may not be referred for, or continue, disability processing. DETERMINATION : The subject application was not submitted within the time required.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081480C070215
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. It is noted that the clemency...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056135C070420
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 24 March 1970, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050007335C070206
The applicant states that, although his discharge was correct at the time he was separated, his character and conduct since his discharge warrants an upgrade. The applicant’s service personnel records show he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal. The applicant's record of service included one nonjudicial punishment for being AWOL and two special courts-martial for being AWOL.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050016005C070206
The applicant requests his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 24 December 1969, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an undesirable discharge. The applicant requested that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010028
While AWOL from Fort Ord, he was arrested and then convicted of robbery (2nd Class Felony) and sentenced to 5 years confinement. On 4 January 1978, the Army Discharge Review Board, under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP), denied the applicant's petition for an upgrade of his discharge. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083935C070212
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. There is no evidence that the...