IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 16 October 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140005411
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, the sister of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests, in effect, correction of the FSMs military records to show his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge upgraded.
2. The applicant states she is trying to obtain a grave marker for the FSM from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The FSM had no misconduct, but only wanted to spend some time with his older brother Jim who had returned from the Republic of Vietnam.
3. The applicant provides copies of:
* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge)
* FSMs Birth Certificate
* Applicants Birth Certificate
* FSMs Death Certificate
* Federal Benefits for Veterans, page 70, Eligibility for burial and memorial benefits
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 applicants 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 applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. On 29 September 1970, the FSM enlisted in the Regular Army. He completed his initial training as a stock control and accountability specialist.
3. On 20 March 1971, the FSM was assigned to Company C, Headquarters Command, Fort Leonard Wood, MO.
a. He was absent without leave (AWOL) for 1 day during 26-27 April 1971.
b. He was AWOL for 8 days from 3 to 10 May 1971 and accepted nonjudicial punishment for his misconduct.
4. On 30 July 1971, the FSM departed Fort Leonard Wood, MO for duty in the Republic of Korea (ROK).
a. On 12 September 1971, he was assigned to the 30th Ordnance Company.
b. On 28 October 1971, he was advanced to specialist four, pay grade E-4.
5. The discharge packet is missing from the FSMs military records. However, his DD Form 214 shows that he was administratively discharged on 9 August 1972, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. His service was characterized as UOTHC. He completed 1 year, 8 months, and 6 days of creditable active duty and had 66 days of lost time.
6. There is no indication that the FSM applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
7. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations):
a. 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 members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
b. 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.
8. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR)) provides that the Board begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends that the FSMs military records should be corrected so she may obtain a grave marker from the VA.
2. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record.
3. The available records do not contain any evidence of the misconduct that led to the FSM's discharge but it does appear to be related to his AWOL. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any substantiating evidence or convincing argument to support her contention that the FSMs discharge was unjust. AWOL from the Army is misconduct.
4. The applicant's desire to obtain a VA grave marker is not justification for an upgrade of the FSMs discharge.
5. In view of the foregoing, the applicant's request should be denied.
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) AR20110020309
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140005411
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009413
On 6 May 1968, the FSM was discharged accordingly. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, also 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009208
The applicant, the spouse of the former service member (FSM), requests the FSM's undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. This decision states the VA determined the FSM's military service for the period 10 January 1969 through 13 April 1971 was "HONORABLE FOR VA PURPOSES. While the VA acting under its regulatory authority determined it would provide healthcare benefits to the FSM for a period of his service it determined was honorable, the FSM's record shows he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018576
The applicant, the sister of a deceased former service member (FSM), request upgrade of her brother's undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, provided the authority for discharging enlisted personnel for unfitness. c. Paragraph 1-8f(1), an undesirable discharge is an administrative separation from the Army under conditions other than honorable.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002117
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 4 May 1978, the separation authority approved his request for discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service - in lieu of court-martial with a UOTHC discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015425
The applicant states, in effect, information she has gathered shows the rank on her father's grave marker in Margraten Cemetery, Netherlands, as private first class (PFC); however, it should show sergeant (SGT). The applicant contends the military service records (and grave marker) of the FSM should be corrected to show his rank as SGT because he was promoted to SGT on 1 March 1945. However, there is no official evidence of record and the evidence provided is insufficient to support...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014282
The FSMs military records are not available to the Board for review. The Form 7202 which shows the FSM was apparently a private when he died on 6 November 1918, the newspaper article provided by the applicant which states the FSM's wife received a telegram from the War Department informing her that the FSM had been killed in action on 6 November in France, and the photograph of the FSM's grave marker in France are accepted as sufficient evidence on which to base award of the Purple Heart. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009604
The applicant requests, in effect, that the record of her late father, a former service member (FSM), be reviewed to confirm he was a Silver Star (SS) recipient and confirm his eligibility for the Bronze Star Medal (BSM). The applicant provides the following documents in support of her request: Self-Authored Statement; Power of Attorney; two Certificates of Birth; Pennsylvania Drivers License; VA Form 40-1330 (Application for Standard Government Headstone or Marker); WD AGO Form 53-55...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001754
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). It is clear that the FSM's last name was incorrectly spelled and recorded in his military documents. Based on the forgoing evidence the FSM's military records should be corrected to show his last name as "Rasxxxxxx."
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014494
The applicant requests that the records of his deceased brother, a former service member (FSM), be corrected by upgrading his discharge under other than honorable conditions to an honorable discharge. The applicant states the FSM served honorably and his discharge should reflect his service. However, his records do contain a duly-authenticated DD Form 214 which shows he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 21 November 1983 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010684
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 February 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130010684 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that the records of his uncle, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show his date of birth (DOB) as "16 September 1924" vice "16 September 1925." The available record is void of documentation showing the DOB he provided at the time of his induction.