RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 24 April 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080002002
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.
Director
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Chairperson
Member
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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that at the time he accepted the undesirable discharge, he had the option of receiving a general discharge. He further states that he just wanted to go home and other men in the same situation received a general discharge.
3. The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of this case.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 March 1972 and successfully completed basic training and advanced individual training. He was awarded military occupational specialty 11C (Infantry Indirect Fire Crewman).
3. The applicant's records show that he was absent without leave (AWOL) for the period 5 September 1972 through 7 September 1972.
4. In September 1972, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for being AWOL for the period 22 September 1972 through 25 September 1972.
5. On 20 November 1972, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for failure to get a haircut and failure to be at his appointed place of duty.
6. On 7 December 1972, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for breaking restriction.
7. Evidence of record shows that the applicant was AWOL for the periods
15 December 1972 through 21 December 1972 and 22 December 1972 through
26 December 1972.
8. The applicant's court-martial charge sheet is not available for review.
9. The applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service packet is also not available. However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 1 March 1973 he was discharged on under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of "FOR THE GOOD OF THE SERVICE" with an undesirable discharge, characterized as under conditions other than honorable. The applicant completed a total of 11 months and 4 days of creditable active service with 18 days lost due to AWOL.
10. 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. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt.
11. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier 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 Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's record shows that he received three Article 15s and had four instances of AWOL. He had completed 11 months and 4 days of creditable active service before his separation with a total of 18 lost days due to AWOL. Based on these facts, the applicants service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel which are required for issuance of a general discharge.
2. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that all requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__XX ___ ___XX _ ___XX _ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
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.
____ XX__________
CHAIRPERSON
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080002002
4
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
1901 SOUTH BELL STREET 2ND FLOOR
ARLINGTON, VA 22202-4508
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004833
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to upgrade his discharge. Evidence of record shows that the applicant received four Article 15s and was confined by military authorities. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004165
On 29 April 1974, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel). On 17 May 1974, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 and directed that the applicant be issued an undesirable discharge. The authors...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004672
On 11 July 1973, the applicant requested discharge for the good of the service. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008725
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 29 January 1975, the applicants commander signed an elimination packet on the applicant for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unfitness. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000892
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 April 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090000892 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general under honorable conditions discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007911
The applicant arrived in the Republic of Vietnam on 19 June 1971 and was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Support Command, Saigon. However, his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows that he was discharged on 27 July 1973 under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial with an undesirable discharge and service characterized as under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002365
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general under honorable conditions discharge. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) within its 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004611
However, his DD Form 214 shows that he was discharged on 27 November 1973 under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of "For Good of the Service" with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The author stated that he has known the applicant for 17 years. The applicant contends that the two months in the stockade was enough punishment for his AWOL infractions and at that time he was young with a pregnant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006967
In his request for discharge, he indicated he understood that if his request for discharge was accepted, he may be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Chapter 10 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses, for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge, could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service at any time after court-martial...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014513
x The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's record of service shows he received two Article 15s, one for wrongfully using marijuana and one for being AWOL for 5 days, and he was convicted by a special court-martial for being AWOL for 40 days.