BOARD DATE:	  28 June 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120000719 


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 upgrade of his undesirable discharge.

2.  He states he was told he would be given a $1,500 bonus when he enlisted under the buddy plan once he completed advanced individual training (AIT).  He asked about the money, but his name wasn't on the list to get the bonus.  He went home for a weekend and he didn't return.  

3.  He provides his DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract – Armed Forces of the United States). 

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 17 August 1972 for a period of three years.  His enlistment contract indicates he enlisted for the U.S. Army Combat Arms Buddy Plan enlistment option, basic combat training at Fort Jackson, SC, and assignment at the 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile), Fort Bragg, NC.  His enlistment contract does not indicate he enlisted for an enlistment bonus.  Upon completion of AIT, he was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  

3.  His DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet) is not available in his military service record.  

4.  He consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In doing so, he acknowledged he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.  He also acknowledged he might be ineligible for many or all Army benefits administered by the Veterans Administration if an undesirable discharge was issued.  He elected to submit statements in his own behalf.  His statements are not available.  

5.  On 24 July 1973, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 with an undesirable discharge.

6.  He was discharged on 3 August 1973 after completing 7 months and 2 days of creditable active service with 138 days of lost time.  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) indicates three periods of lost time from:

* 29 December 1972 to 26 February 1973
* 2 April to 24 May 1973
* 6 June to 3 July 1973

7.  On 17 November 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  

   a.  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 charges were preferred.  Commanders would ensure that an individual was not coerced into submitting a request for discharge for the good of the service.  Consulting counsel would advise the member concerning the elements of the offense or offenses charged, type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of Veterans Administration benefits, and the possibility of prejudice in civilian life because of the characterization of such a discharge.  An Undesirable Discharge Certificate would normally be furnished an individual who was discharged for the good of the Service.  

   b.  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.
   
   c.  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.

9.  The Army Times website states the Army offers various enlistment options, including the Buddy Team Enlistment Option, which allows two non-prior service applicants from the same area who join the Army at the same time to stay together through basic training and advanced individual training.  They also will be assigned to the same duty station for at least 12 months.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends he was told he would be given a $1,500 bonus at the time of his enlistment.  However, his service record is void of evidence to support his claim.  His enlistment contract indicates he enlisted for the buddy plan and there is no evidence which indicates he was authorized an enlistment bonus.  

2.  His DD Form 214 indicates he had three periods of lost time for a total of 138 days.  

3.  Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, require an admission of guilt to the offense(s) charges and the requests are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  As such, government regularity insofar as the discharge process must be presumed.  It is presumed all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Further, it 
appears the applicant’s discharge reflects his overall record of military service.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to either a general or an honorable 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)                                         AR20120000719





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120000719



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1