Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019649
Original file (20130019649.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  19 June 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130019649 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show he was discharged in January 1980 instead of January 1979.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the year of his discharge is incorrect because he served on active duty 3 years.  

3.  The applicant provides a DD Form 214 for the period ending 4 January 1979. 

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 3 January 1977.

3.  On 28 November 1978, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant.

4.  On an unknown date, 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, due to charges preferred against him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which authorized the imposition of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

5.  On 20 December 1978, the separation authority approved his request for discharge.

6.  Orders issued by Headquarters, 25th Infantry Division, dated 2 January 1979, show the applicant's scheduled date of discharge as 4 January 1979.  

7.  His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 4 January 1979 with his service characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  It also shows he competed 2 years and 2 days of active duty service.

8.  On 1 July 1980, the Army Discharge Review Board upgraded the applicant's discharge to general, under honorable conditions.  He was reissued a DD Form 214 that also shows the date of his discharge as 4 January 1979.  

9.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separations Documents), in effect during the applicant's active duty service, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It established standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It stated the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active service.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows he requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and that his request was approved on 20 December 1978.

2.  Separation orders confirm the scheduled date of his discharge was 4 January 1979.  Therefore, it appears the date of discharge shown on his DD Form 214 is correct.  

3.  The applicant failed to provide evidence showing he was discharged on 
4 January 1980.  As a result, there is no basis to grant the 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)                                         AR20130019649



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130019649



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009165

    Original file (20140009165.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    BOARD DATE: 29 January 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140009165 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. However, his record contains court-martial charges for being AWOL as well as a DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged under other than honorable conditions in lieu of trial by court-martial on 27 February 1980 under the provisions of Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021019

    Original file (20090021019.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 18 July 1980, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed he receive a UOTHC discharge. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement that would have supported the issuance of an HD or a GD by the separation authority at the time of his discharge or that would support an upgrade to an HD or a GD at this time.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013593

    Original file (20130013593.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed characterization of his service as under other than honorable conditions. The applicant contends that his discharge under other than honorable conditions should be upgraded to general under honorable conditions because he was young and immature and he thought he was doing the right thing when he was AWOL. The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with being AWOL, he acknowledged being AWOL...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006377

    Original file (20120006377.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. His record then shows the following: * absent without leave (AWOL) from Fort Jackson during the period 17 October 1978 through 27 November 1978 * returned to military control (RMC) at Fort Meade, MD on 28 November 1978 * transferred to the U.S. Army Personnel Control Facility (PCF), Fort Dix, NJ on 4 December 1978 * AWOL during the period 4 December 1978 through 17 March 1979 * RMC at Fort Dix on 18 March 1979 * AWOL during the period 5...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018806

    Original file (20140018806.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In his request for discharge, he acknowledged he understood if the discharge request were approved, he might be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. In a statement he submitted in his own behalf, he stated the reason he felt he should be given a chapter 10 discharge is because he reenlisted in October 1978 for assignment to the 19th Support Command, Korea, and a special duty assignment. There is no...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017778

    Original file (20140017778.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. He was credited with completing 4 months and 26 days of active service and time lost from 13 November 1979 through 20 January 1980, 17 through 21 May 1980, and 23 May through 14 July 1980.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003190

    Original file (20140003190.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the applicant's records show that 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 due to charges being preferred against him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. The evidence also shows that his voluntary...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004617

    Original file (20110004617.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Chapter 10 of that regulation provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Although an HD or GD is authorized, a UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003807

    Original file (20140003807.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge. Following consultation with legal counsel, he 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. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with a characterization of service of under other than honorable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003325

    Original file (20150003325.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    BOARD DATE: 20 October 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150003325 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 14 January 1980, the discharge authority approved the applicant's request for a chapter 10 discharge.