BOARD DATE:	  31 December 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130008486 


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, in effect, an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states all he wants is to have his discharge upgraded so he can receive a military funeral.  His records have been confused with his brother and it seems that every time he requests his records, they are on loan.

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), dated 23 July 1971
* DD Form 214, dated 18 April 1973
* Undated, self-authored statement to " S - - - - D - - - -"

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 for 3 years on 18 February 1970.  He completed training as an armor crewman.

3.  After completing 1 year, 5 months, and 6 days of total active service this period, the applicant was honorably discharged 23 July 1971, for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.  He received a DD Form 214 showing this period of service.

4.  On 24 July 1971, he reenlisted in the Army for 4 years.

5.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 19 May 1972 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and on 19 October 1972 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 5 October 1972 until 16 October 1972.

6.  On 16 March 1973, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 6 November 1972 until 1 February 1973.

7.  The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not filed in his Army Military Human Resource Record.  The DD Form 214 he received at the end of his 24 July 1971 reenlistment shows he was discharged on 18 April 1973, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 13, due to unfitness – frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military or civilian authorities.  His DD Form 214 also shows his date of entry into the Army as 18 February 1970, instead of 24 July 1971.  He received an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

8.  The applicant provides an undated, self-authored statement to an individual by the name of S - - - - D - - - - in which he explains the errors that he contends are shown on his DD Form 214 and why he went AWOL after not receiving an enlistment bonus.

9.  A review of the available records does not show that the applicant was entitled to an enlistment bonus or a reenlistment bonus while he was in the Army.

10.  His records do not show that he ever petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.




11.  Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, governed the policies and procedures for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 13-5a provided for separation for unfitness, that included frequent incidents of a discreditable nature.  When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

2.  The available record shows the applicant accepted two NJPs and was convicted by a special court-martial, each for unauthorized absences.  He was discharged for unfitness due to frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  According to the applicable regulation, the undesirable discharge he received is proper.

3.  The Army does not have nor has it ever had a policy that provides for the upgrade of a discharge for military burials.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.  Although his discharge packet is not available for review, there is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any evidence that suggests there was any error or injustice related to his separation processing.

4.  A review of the available records does not show that the applicant was entitled to an enlistment bonus or a reenlistment bonus while he was in the Army. Even if he was, his going AWOL was not the appropriate avenue to get the relief he sought.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

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)                                         AR20130008486



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130008486



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1