BOARD DATE:	  30 October 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140006370 


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 a discharge upgrade.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, sufficient time has passed for his discharge to be upgraded.  He served honorably for 4 years and earned an Expert Infantryman Badge.  Rather than receiving help and counseling, he was discharged as a result of a driving under the influence charge, which occurred while stationed in Germany.  He currently is an upstanding citizen, the patriarch of his family, and deserves a military funeral.  

3.  The applicant provides a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

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 16 March 1981.  He entered active duty at Fort Benning, GA, completed one station unit training, and he was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).  The highest rank/grade he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four/E-4.

3.  Available records indicate the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on the following occasions:

* on 26 August 1982, for leaving his appointed place of duty without authority
* on 16 April 1984, for operating a privately-owned vehicle without a license, failing to report a traffic accident, leaving the scene of an accident, and failing to report to his prescribed place of duty

4.  The applicant’s discharge packet is not available.  However, there is sufficient evidence for a fair and impartial review.  His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 11 December 1985, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He completed a total of 4 years, 8 months, and 26 days of creditable active military service.

5.  There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

6.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  

   a.  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 at any time after the charges have been preferred.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

   b.  Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is given when the quality of the Soldier’s service has generally met standards of acceptable conduct and duty performance.  

   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 contention that his discharge should be upgraded was carefully considered; however, there was insufficient evidence to support his request.

2.  Absent evidence to the contrary, the applicant’s request for separation for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 is presumed to have been voluntary, administratively correct, and in compliance with applicable regulations.

3.  There is no evidence the applicant was not properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time and that all requirements of law and regulations were not met or that the rights of the applicant were not fully protected throughout the separation process.  Absent such evidence, regularity must be presumed in this case.

4.  The applicant's record reflects a history of indiscipline.  The applicant's disciplinary history clearly diminished the overall quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Accordingly, there is no basis upon which to grant the requested relief.

5.  The ABCMR does not grant requests for discharge upgrades solely for the purpose of making an applicant eligible for veteran's benefits.  Every case is individually decided based upon its merits when an applicant requests a change in his or her discharge.  Additionally, the granting of veteran’s benefits is not within the purview of the ABCMR.  Therefore, any questions regarding eligibility for health care and other benefits should be addressed to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

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)                                         AR20140006370



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140006370



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1