IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  16 December 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140008795 


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 military records by upgrading his undesirable discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states he was drafted and his wife was expecting their third child.  She was having medical problems and needed his help to care for the other two children.  He applied three times for a hardship discharge but the paperwork was lost each time.  He was young and did what he felt he had to do.  Now, he is older and would like an honorable discharge.

3.  The applicant provides copies of:

* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge)
* Special Orders Number 291, Fort Dix, NJ, dated 18 October 1973 (second page only)
* Letter, Order of Ejection, Fort Dix, NJ, dated 18 October 1973
* DD Form 258A (Undesirable Discharge Certificate), dated 18 October 1973
* Letter, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) dated 23 April 2014

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 23 August 1972, the applicant, at 24 years of age, was inducted into the Army of the United States.  He completed the Basic Combat Training (BCT) course and was subsequently enrolled in the Advanced Individual Training (AIT) course for wireman training.  His conduct and efficiency was unsatisfactory.

3.  On 13 December 1972, the applicant was enrolled in another AIT course as a food service specialist.

4.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) from 17 January to 5 February 1973, and again from 15 March to 3 August 1973.

5.  The discharge packet is missing from his military records.  However, the applicant’s request for discharge for the good of the service is available and shows that he consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the possible effects of an under other than honorable conditions discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him.  However, the specific elements of his offense(s) is not stated in his request.

6.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that he was administratively discharged on 18 October 1973, under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  His service was characterized as under conditions other than honorable.  He completed 8 months and 18 days of creditable active duty service and had 162 days of lost time.

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



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

   a.  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 at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate at the time.
	
   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 (emphasis added), 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.  

9.  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 his military records should be corrected by upgrading his undesirable discharge to honorable because he was young and did what he had to do to care for his family.

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 appears to be commensurate with his overall record.

3.  The applicant’s lengthy period of lost time rendered his service unsatisfactory. 

4.  The applicant's contention that he was young at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The applicant was 24 years of age and had satisfactorily completed BCT.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant an honorable or a general discharge; therefore, 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)                                         AR20130021516



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140008795



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1