| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy L. Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Mark D. Manning | Member | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant states that, due to an injury to his right hand and a lack of medical attention, he went home to have it attended to. After his hand healed, he came back but he was terminated with a discharge UOTHC.
3. The applicant provides no supporting evidence.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an error or injustice which occurred on 21 August 1974. The application submitted in this case is dated 5 May 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 6 December 1972. He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 76Y (Armorer/Unit Supply Specialist).
4. A DD Form 261 (Report of Investigation Line of Duty and Misconduct Status) dated 24 October 1973 shows the applicant had accidentally lacerated his right forearm on 1 August 1973 when he struck a glass pane with his right hand. A witness statement from his roommate indicated that his roommate took him to the emergency room. An attached statement from his commander indicated the investigation was held up when the applicant departed absent without leave (AWOL).
5. On 11 October 1973, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failing to go his appointed place of duty and for being AWOL from on or about 10 September to on or about 25 September 1973.
6. On 15 October 1973, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for breaking restriction.
7. On 10 January 1974, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for two specifications of absenting himself from his place of duty.
8. On 4 February 1974, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for absenting himself from his unit.
9. On 4 March 1974, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for absenting himself from his appointed place of duty and for breaking restriction.
10. On or about 24 April 1974, the applicant received an approved local bar to reenlistment. The bar to reenlistment cited the applicant's record of NJPs, a letter of indebtedness dated 27 February 1974, and the applicant's 1 February 1974 conviction by the 205th Judicial District Court, El Paso, TX for fraudulent use of a credit card.
11. On 28 May 1974, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for absenting himself from his place of duty.
12. The applicant's discharge packet is not available.
13. On 10 July 1974, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation. He was found to have no signs of being psychotic or neurotic. He was found to be mentally responsible, to be able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.
14. On 21 August 1974, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-5a(1) by reason of unfitness. He had completed 1 year, 8 months, and 16 days of creditable active service and had 26 days of lost time and 15 days of excess leave.
15. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 13-5a(1), then in effect, contained the policy and outlined the procedures for separating individuals for unfitness when they were involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities and it was established that further efforts at rehabilitation were unlikely to succeed or they are not amenable to rehabilitation measures.
16. Army Regulation 635-200 states, in pertinent part, that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’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. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. It is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. There is no evidence of record to show the applicant was denied medical treatment for an injured right hand at any time.
2. The evidence of record shows the applicant had an extensive history of misconduct to include a civilian conviction for fraudulent use of a credit card.
3. 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. The type of discharge given was and still is appropriate.
4. Records show the applicant should have discovered the error or injustice now under consideration on 21 August 1974; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 21 August 1977. 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
__jns___ __mdm___ __bje___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003090881 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20031118 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19740821 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, ch 13 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A51.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | Mr. Chun |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014184
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general, or an honorable discharge. On 18 November 1974, the applicant's commander recommended that the applicant be discharged under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation) Chapter 13, paragraph 13-5a (1) for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities and subjecting himself to punitive action under UCMJ. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016644
The DD Form 214 that he was issued at the time of his discharge shows that he completed only 1 year, 9 months, and 13 days of active duty service, and that he had 489 days of lost time. Additionally, he provided a third-party letter, dated 31 July 2008, from a pastor who essentially stated that he has known the applicant for at least 10 years and that he has talked to the applicant several times in the month prior to his letter. Soldiers discharged by reason of unfitness were normally...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9506410C070209
He was advanced to pay grade E-2 effective 22 May 1973. His DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) indicates that he was discharged on 26 July 1974, in pay grade E-1, under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-5a, with an UD certificate (character of service UOTHC). 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017963
There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this paragraph. The evidence of record confirms the applicant demonstrated he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel as evidenced by the NJP he received for failing to go to his place of duty on...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007458
The applicant's military personnel records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 December 1970 for a period of 3 years. The board recommended that the applicant be separated from the military service with a general discharge. Eligibility for the program was restricted to individuals discharged with either an undesirable discharge under other than honorable conditions or a general discharge between 9 August 1964 and 28 March 1973, inclusive.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013495
The commander stated that if discharge was Effected he could receive an undesirable discharge. This regulation further provided that an individual separated for unfitness would be furnished an undesirable discharge certificate, except that an honorable or general discharge certificate may have been issued if the individual had been awarded a personal decoration or if warranted by the particular circumstances in their case. Army Regulation 635-200 provides that a general discharge is a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025853
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 25 March 1974, the applicants unit commander recommended the applicant be discharged for unfitness in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Separations), chapter 13. On 30 May 1974, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicants separation with a UD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076484C070215
The Board considered the following evidence: DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: The fact his prior service was good does not warrant granting the relief requested for his last period of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008414
On 13 September 1974, the applicant was notified of the proposed action taken to separate him under the provisions of paragraph 13-5a(1) of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel) for unfitness. The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant on 17 October 1974, the date of his separation, shows he was discharged from the Army under the provisions of paragraph 13-5a(1), Army Regulation 635-200. The applicant's military record does not include any evidence to show he...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005371C070208
On 10 January 1974, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, with an undesirable discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635- 200, chapter 13 for unfitness. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. In regards to her court-martial conviction, the applicant may have been accused of forging a prescription for Quaalude but the court-martial found her not guilty of that charge.