Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004374C070205
Original file (20060004374C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        14 DECEMBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060004374


      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.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Gale J. Thomas                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John Slone                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Lester Echols                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Michael Flynn                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his records be corrected by upgrading his
discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states that he was drafted in July 1972, and was
discharged in 1974 under honorable conditions.  He was trained for Vietnam
but was never sent because the war was ending.  He feels he served his
country with good conduct and asks that he be given an honorable discharge,
which is what he feels he deserves.

3.  He further states that he was married with a son, and was having
marital problems.  He went home to work things out with his wife, but
realizes he went about it all wrong.

4.  The applicant provides copies of his 6 June 1974 and 13 September 1983,
separation documents in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 13 September 1983.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 15 March 2006.

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 limitations 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 was initially inducted into the Army of the United States
on
20 July 1972, for a period of 2 years, and was honorably discharged on 6
June 1974, for immediate reenlistment.  On 7 June 1974, he enlisted in the
Regular Army for a period of 4 years.





4.  The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) indicates
his conduct and efficiency ratings while in basic and advanced individual
training were rated as excellent.

5.  His Enlisted Efficiency Report for the period January 1973 to March
1974 was rated at outstanding.

6.  On 22 March 1974, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the
provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for disobeying
a lawful order to get a hair cut.  His punishment was 14 days of
restriction.

7.  Documents in the applicant's records show he was absent without leave
(AWOL) from 28 July 1974 to 29 July 1974 and from 30 July 1974 to 8 October
1974.

8.  The facts and circumstances concerning the applicant's discharge
proceedings are not in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214
(Certificate of Release or Discharge form Active Duty) indicates he was
discharged on 13 September 1983, under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, Chapter 14, for misconduct-desertion.  His DD Form 214 also shows
he had 1 year, 10 months and 17 days of active service, and 1,922 days of
lost time after the expiration of his term of service (ETS), and 1,401 days
of lost time before his ETS.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and
prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific
categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct,
commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities,
desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a
member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is
impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 also states 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.







DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the
discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulation
applicable at the time.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were
appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  The Board notes the applicant's good conduct and efficiency during his
initial training, and his service for the period January 1973 to March
1974, however, it does not negate his periods of AWOL and is insufficient
to warrant the relief requested.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in
error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would
satisfy that requirement.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 13 September 1983; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
12 September 1986.  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
timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JS___  __LE____  ___MF  _  DENY APPLICATION








BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                                  _______John Slone_________
                                            CHAIRPERSON








                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060004374                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061214                                |
|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.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050010472

    Original file (20050010472.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides the military medical treatment records that are on file with his VA record. Title 38, United States Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service. There is no medical evidence that indicates he was physically disqualified from further military service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060005895C070205

    Original file (20060005895C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Rea Nuppenau | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant was serving on active duty during a period in which the award of the NDSM was authorized. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the NDSM and the GCMDL for the period of 8 September 1958 through 7 September 1961, while serving in the rank of specialist four.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060005926C070205

    Original file (20060005926C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service, the Board has determined that the applicant should have received the GCMDL for his service from 20 January 1959 through 19 January 1961. Accordingly, those badges should also be added to his records along with the awards of the NDSM and the GCMDL. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the GCMDL for the period of 20 January 1959 to 19...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002990C070205

    Original file (20060002990C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 December 1987, the applicant’s battalion commander recommended the applicant be barred from reenlistment. On 23 August 1989, the applicant’s company commander recommended that his local bar to reenlistment not be removed. On 26 September 2005, the National Personnel Records Center informed the applicant that if he required a copy of his separation document that did not contain his characterization of service, authority and narrative reason for separation, reenlistment eligibility...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100515C070208

    Original file (2004100515C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The evidence of record shows the applicant submitted a statement in support of his request for a chapter 10 discharge in which he indicated that he had gone AWOL due to medical and family problems. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011261

    Original file (20070011261.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his military records to show that he was retired for length of service. While the ADRB found that the characterization of service in this case was inequitable, there is no evidence showing that the Secretary of the Army would have favorably considered a request from the applicant to retire. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant's characterization of service was upgraded from bad conduct to fully honorable.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004285

    Original file (20070004285.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070004285 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. The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (10th Award). Army Regulation (AR) 672-5-1, in effect at the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 040004719C070208

    Original file (040004719C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Larry Olson | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The Honorable Discharge Certificate that he provides with his request shows that he was discharged on 1 September 1975. There appears to not be any good reason now, almost 30 years after his discharge, to correct his record as he has requested.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028632

    Original file (20100028632.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) for the period ending 15 March 1974 to show the Combat Medical Badge (CMB), Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and any other unit awards to which he may be entitled. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. deleting from item 26 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 15 March 1974 the Vietnam...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001260C070205

    Original file (20060001260C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that he be awarded the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL) and all other awards he is authorized for his service. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) as amended provides that the National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 through 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 through 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 through 30 November 1995 and 11 September 2001 to a date to be determined. After carefully examining the...