Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019363
Original file (20090019363.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	 

		BOARD DATE:	  20 May 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090019363 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded.  

2.  The applicant states the following:

* he was having medical problems in the army with memory loss, headaches, and loss of hearing
* he was hit in the head with a steel field helmet three times by the platoon sergeant
* he suffered a brain injury and ear damage
* he had a blood clot in his brain
* the report of injury is in his service medical records
* he was absent without leave (AWOL) after an incident due to reduced brain function

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement, a Standard Form 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care), and a Virginia Department of Corrections Medical Discharge Summary in support of his application.

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 applicant’s 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 applicant’s 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 29 November 1976.  

3.  The applicant’s Chronological Record of Medical Care shows he was treated in August 1977 for being struck in the left ear.  This medical document shows he suffered trauma to his left ear.  

4.  Between June 1977 and January 1978, the applicant accepted three nonjudicial punishments under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being AWOL during the following periods:

* 2 May 1977 to 28 May 1977
* 7 September 1977 to 20 September 1977
* 8 January 1978 to 12 January 1978

5.  Charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 1 April 1978 to 27 June 1978.

6.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  In doing so, he admitted guilt to the offense charged and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life and that he might be ineligible for many or all Army benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if a UOTHC discharge was issued.  He did not submit statements in his own behalf.

7.  In the company commander’s recommendation, he stated the following:

* the applicant had no motivation for continued service
* the applicant would not respond to either counseling or rehabilitation
* the applicant had been medically examined and was qualified for separation
* the applicant was not mentally defective, deranged, or abnormal at the time of his misconduct 
8.  The separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with the issuance of a UOTHC Discharge Certificate.

9.  Prior to his discharge, the applicant underwent a medical examination.  The examining physician determined the applicant was qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111.

10.  The applicant was discharged from active duty on 2 August 1978 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a UOTHC discharge.  He had completed 1 year, 3 months and 24 days of active military service with 130 days of lost time.  

11.  The applicant provided a self-authored statement in support of his claim and stated the following:

* he was struck in the head twice and once in his left hear by the platoon sergeant
* he was bleeding from his ear and woke up hours later in the infirmary 
* he was told he has suffered severe trauma to the left ear and he had a big knot on his head 
* he started having hearing loss in his left ear and severe headaches
* he lost focus on military exercises
* he tried to get help from the military but was refused
* his administrative discharge was approved

12.  There is no evidence which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.

13.  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 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.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

14.  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 Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contentions regarding his medical problems with memory loss, headaches, and loss of hearing are noted.  His medical service record confirms he was treated in August 1977 for being struck in his left ear.  However, he has provided no evidence other than his self-authored statement that the extenuating circumstances regarding his medical problems were the reason he committed the offense (AWOL) which led to his discharge.

2.  The evidence of record shows that prior to the applicant's separation in August 1978, competent medical authority determined that he was then medically qualified for separation with a physical profile of 111111.  

3.  The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  

4.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a UOTHC discharge.  He was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but he declined to do so.

5.  The applicant's record of service shows he was AWOL for 130 days.  As a result, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel for either a general under honorable conditions or fully honorable discharge.

6.  The evidence of record does not indicate the actions taken in his case were in error or unjust, therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X___  ____X___  ____X___  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.



      _______ _   _X______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090019363





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090019363



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005719C070206

    Original file (20050005719C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's personnel records contain a DA Form 2173 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status) dated 3 October 1977 which indicates the applicant was hit by a car on 15 September 1977 and he was admitted to the U.S. Army Hospital at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. He had completed 2 years, 8 months, and 5 days of active military service with 261 days of lost time due to AWOL.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016578

    Original file (20100016578.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time, a discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate. He contends he sustained injuries while in the service and service medical records show he was treated for various injuries but his physical profile dated 18 April 1978 was 111111. Without having the discharge packet to consider, it is presumed his characterization of service was commensurate with his overall record of service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000582

    Original file (20150000582.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his character and reason for discharge be upgraded from an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) in lieu of trial by court-martial discharge to an honorable discharge due to physical disability. Also on 8 October 1980, after consulting with counsel and being advised of this rights and options, the applicant submitted a formal request under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002819

    Original file (20120002819.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Medical records provided by the applicant indicate he was wounded during a mortar attack on 9 April 2004 in Iraq. Throughout his medical record there is no discussion of an MEB while he was serving on active duty. The applicant provided a letter from an Air Force neurologist, dated 5 February 2010 (1 month after his separation), stating the applicant should be reinstated on active duty to perform an MEB.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007991

    Original file (20100007991.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 February 1984, the applicant was honorably released from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, for completion of required active service. There are no service medical records available. Evidence of record shows the applicant's physical profile was 111111 on 25 May 1983, 2 years after his reported head injury.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009523

    Original file (20110009523.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states his discharge should be upgraded because the Army did not take him to the doctor to find out what was wrong with him. The applicant's service medical records were not available for review. On 11 April 1978, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be issued DD Form 794A (UOTHC Discharge Certificate).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006163C070206

    Original file (20050006163C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 August 1976, the applicant's commander requested orders be published ordering the applicant to active duty for 15 months and 2 days for unexcused absences from unit training assemblies. The applicant's commander also stated that, when the applicant appeared at the Reserve Center after the battalion had departed for field training (during the 17 and 18 July 1976 meeting), he was told by the battalion commander to go to a classroom and wait and that he (the applicant) would then be...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01533

    Original file (PD-2013-01533.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Informal PEB adjudicated “TBI with residual neck pain and headaches;” “low back pain (LBP);” and “left knee pain with degenerative joint disease (DJD),” as unfitting, rated at 10%, 10%, and 0% respectively, with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The Board could not find evidence in the commander’s statement or elsewhere in the treatment record that documented any significant interference of the neck pain condition with the performance of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00348

    Original file (PD2011-00348.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    Nevertheless, given the CI’s history of starting college prior to separation, employment after separation, and normal performance on tests of “intellectual abilities, memory, executive control, language, and visual-spatial functioning,” the Board agreed that the CI’s level of functioning at separation best fit the VASRD §4.130 10% criteria, “occupational and social impairment due to mild or transient symptoms which decrease work efficiency and ability to perform occupational tasks only...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006108

    Original file (20090006108.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant provides a letter, dated 9 April 2008, from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA); his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty); and a personal statement, dated 26 January 2009, in support of his application. The applicant contends that his service record will show he had a good clean record and excelled in rank from E-1 to E-4 prior to the alleged AWOL.