IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE:	  22 April 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130014661 


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 undesirable discharge.  

2.  He states:

	a.  He served honorably until he returned from 2 years in Vietnam.  When he returned, everything was so bad and he was having trouble readjusting to life.

   b.  There was no one to talk to or to get help from.  He thought he had accomplished something, he served two years and came home, but people spit on him and threw dog manure at him.  He didn't want to return to the States from Vietnam.  
   
   c.  He told his commanding officer that he heard he could apply for a discharge for the good of the service.  He filled out the paperwork, but after two months he still wasn't out of the military.  He went home on a 3-day pass and stayed for 51 days.  He returned to duty, completed his enlistment, and the 51 days was counted as being absent without leave (AWOL).  He was given an other than honorable discharge instead of a regular discharge.  
   
3.  He provides a self-authored statement, two character references, a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, a letter from the National Personnel Records Center, two DD Forms 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), his DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record - Armed Forces of the United States), and his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record).


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.  On 24 April 1967, the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve under the delayed entry program at the age 17 with parental consent.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 May 1967 and was honorably discharged on 5 May 1968 for immediate reenlistment.  He reenlisted on 6 May 1968 for a period of 3 years and he served in Vietnam from 24 June 1968 to 1 July 1970.  

3.  His disciplinary history includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on two occasions for being AWOL from 5 to 10 August 1970, for failing to report to his appointed place of duty on 12 December 1970 and remaining absent until 13 December 1970, and for failing to perform his duty as Charge of Quarters by being found asleep in the orderly room while on duty

4.  On 6 May 1971, charges were preferred against him for being AWOL from 10 March to 26 April 1971.

5.  He consulted with legal counsel and 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.  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 were issued.  He did not submit statements in his own behalf.  

6.  On 16 June 1971, the separation authority approved his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 with an undesirable discharge.

7.  On 22 June 1971, he was discharged after completing 2 years, 11 months, and 26 days of creditable active service with 51 days of lost time.  

8.  He provided a self-authored statement in which he reiterated his contentions cited on his application and he stated:  

	a.  He was just a young boy when he enlisted under the delayed entry program.  He worked hard, didn't have any problems, and reenlisted after one year in order to go to Vietnam.  

   b.  He was decorated for valor, almost died with malaria, was wounded twice, and received a Purple Heart.  He spent two years in Vietnam and wanted to stay longer, but he was sent back to the States.  He had a hard time adjusting to life when he returned to the States from Vietnam.  

   c.  He felt guilty, was angry all the time and didn't know why, started drinking heavily, didn't have anyone to talk with back then, realized the Army was the problem so he wanted out of the military.  
   
   d.  He applied for early release to go to college, but when it was time to attend school he found out his company commander hadn't submitted his request.  
   
   e.  He submitted a request to be separated for the good of the service and after two months he was still not released from the military.  
   
   f.  He went home on a 3-day pass and stayed for 51 days.  He returned to Fort Bragg, NC and served his remaining service.  On 22 June 1971, he reported for discharge and went through all the out-processing.  He realized he received the discharge he had requested for the good for the service and not an honorable discharge.
   
   g.  He experienced difficulties over the next eleven years by going from job to job and relationship to relationship.  He talked with counselors, was later diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and he was placed on medication.
   
   h.  He went to college, became a paramedic and served as a volunteer fireman.  Also, he worked with the local Law Enforcement and Sheriff Department, and went to the Arkansas Police Academy.  He has now served 19 years in law enforcement for the state of Arkansas and is presently the chief of police for the city of Dyer.  

9.  He also provided two character references from his friend and co-worker who described him as a man of integrity, a leader, dependable, a good worker, a good family man, and trustworthy.

10.  His service record doesn't indicate he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within that board's15-year statute of limitations.

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

12.  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.

13.  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 applicant's record shows he was charged with being AWOL from 10 March to 26 April 1971.  This offense is punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  Discharges under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by 
court-martial.  The applicant voluntarily, willingly, and in writing, requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  All requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

2.  His service record shows he received two Article 15s and had a record of 51 days of lost time.  

3.  He contends he had trouble adjusting to life when he returned from Vietnam.  
However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief without committing the misconduct (AWOL) which led to his discharge.  His personal problems are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.

4.  The applicant’s contentions regarding his post-service achievements and conduct were considered.  However, good post-service conduct alone is not normally a basis for upgrading a discharge.

5.  Based on his record of indiscipline, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct and lost time rendered his service unsatisfactory.  Therefore, he 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)                                         AR20130014661





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130014661



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1