BOARD DATE: 3 November 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110010188
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 an upgrade of his discharge under conditions other than honorable to honorable conditions.
2. The applicant states he should not have received a characterization of under other than honorable conditions. His discharge was based on him being a militant. He was an outstanding Soldier who never received any Article 15's.
3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).
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 applicants record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 January 1973 and he held military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman). He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16). He was assigned to Fort Polk, LA.
3. On 21 March 1973, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failing to go to his prescribed place of duty at the appointed time.
4. Between July and August 1973, he was counseled by several members of his chain of command for failing to get along with others, causing trouble with his fellow trainees and company cadre, lacking motivation, creating disturbances, and performing below standards.
5. On 14 August 1973, the State of Louisiana Department of Corrections, Alexandria, LA, notified his immediate commander that the applicant pled guilty to a charge of possession of marijuana on 8 June 1973 and had been sentenced to 6 months in jail. The sentence was suspended and the applicant was placed on 2 years of probation.
6. On 20 August 1973, he was notified by his immediate commander that discharge action was being initiated against him for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 13.
7. On 20 August 1973, he acknowledged notification of the proposed discharge action. He subsequently consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, the possible effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions, and of the procedures and rights available to him. He further acknowledged he understood if he were issued an undesirable discharge he may be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws and he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life. He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf
8. On 20 August 1973, the brigade chaplain submitted a statement to the applicant's immediate commander wherein he stated he had interviewed the applicant, the applicant had a difficult time adjusting to the military, had a negative attitude, and had stated he wanted to get out of the Army. The chaplain further recommended the applicant be discharged due to his poor attitude and performance.
9. On 27 and 29 August 1973, his chain of command recommended his separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13. His senior commander stated the applicant had been in the unit for only 5 days before being confined in the Leesville County Jail, Leesville, LA, while awaiting trial for possession of marijuana.
10. The separation authority's approval is not available for review with this case. However, the DD Form 214 he was issued shows the applicant was discharged for unfitness on 13 September 1973 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. He completed 7 months and 13 days of creditable active service.
11. There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.
12. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13, in effect at the time, contained the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unfitness. It provided that individuals would be discharged by reason of unfitness when their records were characterized by one or more of the following: (a) frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, (b) sexual perversion, (c) drug addiction, (d) an established pattern of shirking, and/or (e) an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts. This regulation prescribed that an undesirable discharge was normally issued unless the particular circumstances warranted a general or an honorable discharge.
13. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that 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.
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.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence of record shows the applicant demonstrated he could not or would not meet acceptable standards required of enlisted personnel as evidenced by the NJP he received for failing to go to his place of duty; his
conviction by civilian authorities for possessing marijuana; and his frequent counseling for causing trouble, lacking motivation, creating disturbances, and performing below standards. Accordingly, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13.
2. His separation action was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reason for separation were therefore appropriate considering all the facts of the case. Based on his overall record, the applicant's service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable or a general 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 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) AR20110010188
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110010188
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030518
He states, in effect, he did not receive a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) when he was honorably discharged to reenlist upon completion of his first term of service. A DD Form 214 covering the period 12 August 1980 to 28 February 1984 shows he received a UOTHC discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. The version in effect at the time stated a DD Form 214 would not be prepared for enlisted members discharged for immediate...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012910
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 26 November 1973, the convening/separation authority approved the request for discharge and directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of paragraph 13-5a(1) of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of unfitness and that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The evidence of record shows he was 17 years of age at the time of his enlistment and between 20 and 21 years of age at the time of his various offenses.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120011801
The Army failed to provide counseling to him or his wife or help with their marriage. However, his records contain: a. Contrary to his contention that the military failed to rehabilitate him or counsel, the evidence of record shows he was counseled on multiple occasions by his chain of command and was allowed to reclassify (rather than be discharged for failure to meet qualifications for MOS) and reassigned to Fort Polk, LA.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007983
The applicant states that he was found unfit for continued service by reason of misconduct, specifically his failure to follow orders and drug dependency. On 28 March 1975, the separation authority waived the counseling and rehabilitative requirements but ordered a board of officer convened to determine whether the applicant should be separated for unfitness. It states that a service member may be separated when it is determined under the guidance in that the member is unqualified for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007854
The applicant states: * his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under conditions other than honorable * he had no idea he was discharged under dishonorable conditions * if he went to Canada instead of Vietnam he could have received a pardon 3. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate at the time of the applicant's discharge. There is no evidence in his record showing he was dishonorably discharged from the Army.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010792
Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 31 October 2006, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070011287
The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action and submitted a statement in his own behalf. On 23 January 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018953
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. 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. The applicant also acknowledged that he understood the procedures for requesting a review of his discharge by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB);...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120011564
On 26 June 1973, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial consistent with the applicant's chain of command's recommendations and directed his reduction to the lowest enlisted grade, if applicable, and issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an undesirable discharge is normally considered...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013095
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. On 13 August 1974, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate action to eliminate him from the Army under the provisions of chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel) due to unfitness. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic...