BOARD DATE:	  6 August 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120022517 


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 to an honorable discharge.  Additionally he requests his records and/or DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected to show: 

* his reason for restarting basic training
* he qualified with the hand grenade
* the Tube-launched, Optically-tracked, Wire-guided missile (TOW) Gunnery course
* the 194th Armored Calvary as his unit of assignment
* letters from his Congressman 

2.  He provides a brief synopsis of his military service.  He states while in basic training, he was sent home for 30 days for medical reasons.  Upon returning to Fort Knox, KY, he completed basic training, and advanced individual training (AIT).  Upon completion of AIT, he attended an 8-week TOW Gunnery course.   He states he was assigned to the 194th Armored Calvary Brigade and not the 54th Infantry Regiment.  He maintains there was correspondence written by his Congressman verifying information that should have changed his discharge status.  Additionally, he states he was told his discharge would be upgraded to honorable 6 months after the date of his discharge.

3.  He provides a self-authored statement.

 
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 31 August 1982 for a period of 4 years. 

3.  His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) shows in:

   a.  Item 9 (Awards, Decorations and Campaigns), no indication he qualified with the hand grenade.
   
   b.  Item 17 (Civilian Education and Military Schools), U.S. Army Armor Center, Fort Knox, KY, military occupational specialty (MOS)19D (Cavalry Scout), 14 weeks, 1983.

	c.  Item 35 (Record of Assignments), effective 28 January 1983, he was assigned to Combat Support Company (CSC), 4th Battalion, 54th Infantry Regiment, Fort Knox, KY in MOS 19D.

4.  His disciplinary history includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on 10 May 1983, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty on 18 April 1983 and disobeying a lawful order on 29 April 1983.  This Article 15 shows his unit of assignment as CSC, 4th Battalion, 54th Infantry Regiment.  

5.  The applicant's record is void of any orders showing he was awarded an appropriate bar for qualifying with the hand grenade.  There is no evidence to show he completed the TOW Gunnery course.  Additionally, there is no evidence in the available record concerning the reason he "restarted" basic training or any letters from his Congressman.  Although the 4th Battalion, 54th Infantry Regiment was a sub-element of the 194th Armored Brigade, there is no evidence to show he was assigned or attached to this unit.
6.  On 8 November 1983, charges were preferred against him for being absent without leave (AWOL) from CSC, 4th Battalion, 54th Infantry Regiment from 
16 May to 7 November 1983.  

7.  His records also contain a chapter 10 packet that shows on 9 November 1983, he consulted with counsel and he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10.

8.  In his voluntary request for discharge, he indicated he was making the request of his own free will and he had not been subjected to coercion whatsoever by any person.  He acknowledged he understood if his request was accepted he could receive a UOTHC discharge and that by submitting his request he was admitting he was guilty of the charges against him.  He further acknowledged he understood if he received a UOTHC discharge he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA), he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws, and he could encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.  

9.  He also acknowledged he understood that there was no automatic upgrade or review by any Government agency of less than an honorable discharge and that he must apply to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) or the ABCMR if he wanted a review of his discharge.  He acknowledged he realized that the act of consideration by either board did not imply that his discharge would be upgraded. The applicant elected not to provide a statement on his behalf.

10.  On 29 November 1983, the appropriate authority approved his request and directed the issuance of a UOTHC discharge.

11.  His record contains a duly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows in:

* item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) –

* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16)
* Army Service Ribbon

* Item 14 (Military Education) - Cavalry Scout, "14 weeks (8301)"
* item 24 (Character of Service) - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 
* item 25 (Separation Authority) - Chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200
* item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) - For The Good Of The Service - In Lieu of Court-Martial
* item 29 (Dates of Time Lost During This Period) - 12 to 15 May 1983 and 18 May to 6 November 1983

12.  There is no indication the applicant applied to the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

13.  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, the type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of VA benefits, and the possibility of prejudice in civilian life because of the characterization of such a discharge.  Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a UOTHC discharge was normally considered appropriate.

   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.

14.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) sets forth requirements for award of basic badges.  The qualification badge is awarded to indicate the degree – Expert, marksmanship qualification Sharpshooter, and Marksman - in which an individual has qualified in a prescribed record course.  An appropriate bar is furnished to denote each weapon with which the individual has qualified.  (Examples:  Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar or Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar or Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Automatic Rifle Bar.

15.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The regulation states that the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.  Paragraph 2-4 requires the preparer to list formal in-service (full-time attendance) training courses successfully completed during the period of service covered by the DD Form 214.  Include title, length in weeks, and month and year completed.  This information is to assist the Soldier in job placement and counseling; therefore, do not list training courses for combat skills. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial.  In his request he acknowledged he understood that there was no automatic upgrade or review by any Government agency and that he must apply to the ADRB or the ABCMR if he wanted a review of his discharge.  He also acknowledged he understood that the act of consideration by either board did not imply that his discharge would be upgraded. Therefore, his contention that his discharge would be upgraded after 6 months is not supported by the available evidence.

2.  The evidence of record confirms that all requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. The record further shows he admitted he was guilty of being AWOL from 12 to 
15 May 1983 and from 18 May to 6 November 1983.

3.  His record of service included one nonjudicial punishment and 177 days of lost time.  Based on this record of indiscipline, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct rendered his service unsatisfactory.  Therefore, he is not entitled to a general or an honorable discharge.

4.  There is no evidence and the applicant did not provide any to show he qualified with the hand grenade.  Therefore, in the absence of documentation to support his contention there is insufficient evidence to add this badge to his 
DD form 214.

5.  There is no evidence of record and he has not provided evidence to show he successfully completed the TOW Gunnery course.  However, if this information was available the course would not be added to his DD Form 214 because combat skills are not listed on the DD Form 214.  
6.  There is no evidence in the applicant's available record that shows he restarted basic training or letters from his Congressman.  Additionally, there is no evidence that shows he was assigned to the 194th Armored Calvary Brigade at the time of discharge.  Therefore, in the absence of documentation to support his contention, his record is correct as constituted.

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)                                         AR20120022517



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120022517



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1