IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 8 June 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090020915
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 discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general discharge.
2. The applicant states the following:
* he would like his discharge upgraded to a general discharge
* he would like to become eligible for medical benefits
* he is unemployed and in need of medical care
3. The applicant provides a DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) and his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) 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 28 July 1977 for a period of 3 years.
3. The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on three separate occasions between January 1978 and July 1978 for the following offenses:
* wrongfully possessing marijuana and wrongfully possessing paraphernalia
* failing to go to his appointed place of duty
* breaking restriction
4. On 23 June 1978, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 17 June 1978 to 19 June 1978 and breaking restriction. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 20 days.
5. The applicant's discharge packet is not available for review. However, his DD Form 214 indicates he was discharged on 15 August 1978 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph
14-33b(1), for misconduct based on frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. He was issued a UOTHC discharge. He had 1 year and 2 days of creditable active service with 16 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
6. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.
7. 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 included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities; an established pattern for shirking, an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts, and an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to contribute adequate support to dependents. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged for acts or patterns of misconduct. However, the discharge authority may direct an honorable or general discharge if such are merited by the Soldier's overall record.
8. 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 request to upgrade his discharge to a general discharge to become eligible for medical benefits is acknowledged. However, this basis is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.
2. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the applicant's discharge processing is presumed to have been administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.
3. The applicant's service record shows he received three Articles 15 and one summary court-martial. Also, his service record shows 16 days of lost time. It appears his chain of command determined that his overall military service did not meet the standards for a general discharge as defined by Army Regulation
635-200 and his service was appropriately characterized as under other than honorable conditions.
4. 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 requested relief.
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) AR20090020915
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090020915
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011724
On 26 April 1978, the unit commander notified the applicant action was being initiated to separate him under the provisions of Chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation Enlisted Personnel), based on misconduct. His DD Form 214 shows he received a UOTHC discharge, in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-33b(1), by reason of "frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities." Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018487
The applicant requests correction of his record to show he received a "chapter 13 disability discharge" vice a chapter 14-33b (misconduct frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities) discharge. The evidence of record shows the applicant had four Article 15's and he was separated with a general discharge, under honorable conditions discharge by reason of misconduct - frequent incidents of discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007268
He was of no use to the Army. The separation/convening authority approved the discharge action and ordered the applicant discharged under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct and directed he be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. The applicant was discharged on 28 May 1980.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007879
However, his DD Form 214 for the period ending 22 February 1980 shows he was discharged on 22 February 1980 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-33b(1), due to misconduct frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities with a UOTHC discharge. His service record does not indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations. It appears the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007503
On 13 June 1978, the applicants company commander recommended the applicant be separated from the service for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Separation), paragraph 14-33. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations for an upgrade of his discharge. The evidence of record shows the applicant was punished under Article 15...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010104
On 24 August 1981, the applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for misconduct - frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. On 1 September 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011492
On 5 April 1982, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for misconduct. On 14 April 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct and directed he be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066379C070402
On 6 November 1978, the separation authority approved the board of officers recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged from the service for misconduct due to frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with a general discharge. In accordance with a recommendation from a board of officers, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct. The Board reviewed the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009868
His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay (suspended), correctional custody for 7 days, and extra duty. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge or a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001486
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 18 August 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110001486 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 14 April 1981, the applicant's unit commander recommended his separation from the service under the provisions of paragraph 14-33b of Army Regulation 635-200 for misconduct frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities and an established pattern for shirking. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge...