| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Eric S. Moore | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Robert Duecaster | Member | |
| Ms. Linda D. Simmons | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be changed to honorable.
2. The applicant states that after serving over two years active duty he was forced to leave the military for unjust reasons. He also stated that this offense happened nearly 30 years ago.
3. The applicant provides no supporting evidence.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an injustice which occurred on
30 April 1973. The application submitted in this case is dated 23 February 2003.
2. 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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.
3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 April 1971 for a period of
3 years. He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76V (Equipment Storage Specialist).
4. On 19 December 1972, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for the wrongful possession of marijuana. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $43.00 pay per month for 1 month, suspended for sixty days, and extra duty for 7 days, suspended for sixty days.
5. As stated in a Certificate of Unsuitability for Reenlistment memorandum dated 14 February 1973, the applicant had received an Article 15 for two charges of being absent without leave (AWOL). This Article 15 is not available.
6. The applicant’s DA Form 20 shows four periods of AWOL: 23 September through 3 October 1972, 24 October through 26 October 1972, 13 November through 20 November 1972, and 12 February thru 13 February 1973.
7. The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge proceedings are not present in his records.
8. The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged on 30 April 1973 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, separation for unfitness and was issued a discharge UOTHC. He had completed 2 years, 4 months, and 6 days of creditable active service with 24 days of lost time.
9. There is no evidence of record to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within that board’s 15-year statute of limitation.
10. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. At the time, chapter 13 contained the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unfitness. Specific categories included minor infractions, a pattern of misconduct, involvement in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities, and commission of a serious offense. A discharge UOTHC was normally considered appropriate.
11. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, 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. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.
12. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to soldiers whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The discharge packet is not in the applicant’s records. However, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.
2. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was punished under Article 15, UCMJ on two occasions and was AWOL on four separate occasions. His quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty of Army personnel. The type of discharge given was and still is appropriate.
3. Records show the applicant should have discovered the injustice now under consideration on 30 April 1973; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any injustice expired on 30 April 1976. However, the applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to file in this case.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___JL___ ____LDS_ ___RW _ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003086983 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20031120 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19730430 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 Chapter 13 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071854C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: He stated that he was proud of his Vietnam service but was ashamed of the conduct which led to his court-martial and to his present situation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070009983
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant has provided insufficient evidence to show that neither his discharge nor his reduction in rank were unjust. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012357
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001221C070206
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. On 30 November 1977 and 18 August 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 18 August 1981, the date of the ADRB review;...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001221C070206
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. On 30 November 1977 and 18 August 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 18 August 1981, the date of the ADRB review;...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9509132C070209
On 1 March 1974, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, by reason of unfitness with a discharge UOTHC. On 7 March 1974, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulations 635-200, chapter 13, for unfitness with a discharge UOTHC. DETERMINATION: The subject application was not submitted within the time required.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090108C070212
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 Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) should commence on the date of final action by the ADRB. Thus, the applicant should have filed an application with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014944
The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to a general discharge (GD). After consulting with counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel). An undesirable discharge certificate would normally be furnished an individual who was discharged for the good of the Service.
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 | CY2004 | 2004106247C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 January 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR2004106247 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The applicant contends that his discharge should be upgraded because at the time of...