IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  17 December 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130005757 


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 other than honorable conditions to a general discharge.  He also requests correction of item 1 (Last Name, First Name, Middle Name) on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show his first and middle names as John Willie instead of Willie John.

2.  The applicant states:

* His mother was sick and she basically neglecting all motherly duties
* To watch his younger siblings suffer was almost unbearable to watch
* After he completed basic training, he went home on leave and the circumstances had gotten far worse
* Something had to be done so in his haste, he decided not to return to duty and to care for his mother and his siblings
* It was like a dark cloud fell over him and crushed all his dreams of being an outstanding Soldier
* His girlfriend lost their child, his mother's house burned down, and his girlfriend's house burned to the ground
* He hates to think about what would have happened if he had not been there
* He suffers from depression, which is manageable with medication and counseling
* He is currently a member on the Board of Directors for the Mental Health Association of Northwestern, PA

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a self-authored statement, dated 13 March 2013.

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 8 March 1976.  He signed his first and middle name as John Willie on his DD Form 4 (Enlistment or Reenlistment Agreement – Armed Forces of the United States).

3.  On 6 May 1976, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for possession of a controlled substance.  He accepted NJP again on 19 May 1976 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 10 May until 17 May 1976.

4.  On 4 March 1977, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for being AWOL from 3 August 1976 until 4 March 1977.  He acknowledged receipt of the notification on 8 March 1977.  After consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

5.  The separation authority approved the request for discharge on 15 March 1977 and directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  

6.  On 22 March 1977, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He completed 8 months and 9 days of net active service this period.

7.  On his DD Form 214, his first and middle names are shown as Willie John.

8.  There is no evidence that the applicant ever petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.

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

	a.  Chapter 10 provides 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 Veterans Administration benefits, and the possibility of prejudice in civilian life because of the characterization of such a discharge.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions would normally be furnished to 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contentions have been noted.  His supporting evidence has been considered.

2.  There is no evidence in the available record, nor has the applicant submitted sufficient evidence, to support any of the contentions that he now makes.  The available evidence shows he accepted NJP once for possession of a controlled substance and once for being AWOL.  After charges were preferred against him for his second AWOL incident, he submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

3.  He was discharged in accordance with the applicable regulation and the type of discharge he received appropriately characterizes his overall record of service.

4.  The applicant's first and middle names are transposed on his DD Form 214.  

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant's records should be corrected as recommended below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X____  ____X____  ____X____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending item 1 on his DD Form 214 to show his first and middle names as John Willie.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to upgrading his discharge under other than honorable conditions to a general discharge.




      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20130005757



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130005757



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1