Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016830
Original file (20100016830.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    4 January 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100016830 


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 undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states that after 39 years his discharge should be upgraded.

3.  The applicant does not provide any additional documentation.

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’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 January 1967, was awarded the military occupational specialty of clerk typist, immediately reenlisted on 8 December 1967, served in Vietnam from 6 June 1969 to 3 April 1970, and was promoted to pay grade E-5.

3.  The applicant had accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) twice for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on four occasions.

4.  A Criminal Investigation Division (CID) investigation was conducted on an allegation that the applicant made homosexual advances on a male recruit while the applicant was performing duties as a billets clerk at an Armed Forces Entrance Examination Station (AFEES).  

5.  The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation and physical examination and was determined to be medically qualified for separation.

6.  The applicant's commander notified him of his intent to recommend his discharge by reason of unfitness and of his rights in conjunction with that recommendation.  The applicant waived his rights.

7.  The applicant's commander forwarded a recommendation to discharge the applicant for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212.  While the applicant's records do not contain the document approving his discharge, on 20 August 1971 the applicant was given a UD.  The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) with oak leaf cluster (two awards).

8.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the elimination of enlisted personnel for unfitness and unsuitability.  Paragraph   6 of the regulation provided that an individual was subject to separation for unfitness due to homosexual acts during military service.  When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 3-7a states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’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.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, states 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.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's separation was processed in accordance with applicable regulations with no indication that his rights were violated.

2.  Since the document approving the applicant's discharge is not contained in his records, a presumption of regularity must be applied, that what the Army did was correct.  The burden to prove otherwise rests with the applicant.

3.  While the applicant's service was exemplary in Vietnam (as evidenced by his two BSMs) and after he returned to the United States, he used his position and authority inappropriately when dealing with a recruit.  Such behavior certainly warranted a UD even when his prior exemplary service is considered.

4.  The Board does not upgrade a properly-issued discharge based solely on the passage of time.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

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)                                         AR20100016830





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100016830



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016645

    Original file (20130016645.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    This certificate was later withdrawn from the board proceedings due to separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Unfitness). Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) states in: a. Paragraph 3-7a - an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The evidence of record shows the applicant's company commander recommended the applicant's discharge for unfitness.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000414

    Original file (20130000414.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations) sets forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. b. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001414

    Original file (20110001414.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 24 June 1970, his acting commander informed him of the initiation of proceedings to discharge him under the provisions Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness based on frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities. On 6 July 1970, the applicant received a letter of reprimand from his company commander for being in a physical condition such that he could not perform his normal duties. On 14 July 1970, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022609

    Original file (20100022609.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    He provided a DA Form 2823, dated 13 March 1970, which shows an investigator stated that on 11 March 1970 the applicant's father had been advised by the applicant that action had been initiated to discharge him from the Army because of his homosexual problems. 24 April 1970, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness and directed the issuance of a UD Certificate. As a result, the Board recommends...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000776

    Original file (20080000776.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The following members, a quorum, were present: The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. 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. The evidence of record confirms that prior to his record of AWOL-related misconduct,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005085

    Original file (20140005085.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness memorandum, dated 20 September 2011, subject: Correction of Military Records Following Repeal of Section 654 of Title 10, U.S. Code, provides policy guidance for Service Discharge Review Boards (DRB's) and Service Boards for Correction of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007812

    Original file (20100007812.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 August 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100007812 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged for unfitness and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The applicant states he did not know it was a bad discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020319

    Original file (20110020319.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of her discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) states: a. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, provided the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPN codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007454

    Original file (20090007454.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. The commander counseled the applicant, telling him that he thought the applicant could perform his duties without becoming involved in any homosexual activities. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026269

    Original file (20100026269.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general discharge. His discharge orders and DD Form 214 show he was discharged on 10 March 1969 with an undesirable discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unfitness and Unsuitability) under separation program number (SPN) 46A for unsuitability, apathy, defective attitudes, and inability to expend effort constructively. There is no evidence the applicant applied to the...