BOARD DATE:	  15 January 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140009566 


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 (UD) to a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states at 17 years of age he volunteered to be drafted into the U.S. Army.  At this time, he had proposed to his girlfriend and she accepted their engagement.  While serving, he received a "Dear John" letter from his girlfriend.  He was unaware of the type of letter it was and being happy to hear from her, he began reading the letter before realizing it was a letter he didn't want to exist.  This letter called off the engagement.  He was devastated by the words he read in the letter.  Upon his release to return home he immediately went to see his girlfriend to gain a clear understanding of what he had read.  She explained that she had found someone else.  He attempted to reason with her, but was unsuccessful.  He reported to his assigned unit, but the letter and their conversation constantly replayed in his head and he couldn't stop thinking about everything.  He was so stressed over the events that he finally left the military and never returned until his arrest.  He never knew he could request an upgrade of his discharge.

3.  The applicant provides copies of the following:

* Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service memorandum
* Separatee's Copy of Board Proceedings statement
* Expulsion from UniteD States Military Installation letter
* DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty)

* UD Certificate
* four character letters
* Biblical quote
* completed DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States)

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 provide in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of the cases 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 sufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations.

2.  The applicant's complete military records are not available to the Board for review.  However, there is sufficient documentation submitted by the applicant for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.

3.  He provided copies of the following:

   a.  A DD Form 214 which shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 June 1970.  At the time of his enlistment, he was 19 years, 4 months, and 25 days of age.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (light weapons infantryman).

   b.  A Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service memorandum, undated, wherein the Headquarters Command, XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Bragg, NC, was advised of the applicant's approved separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Separations), chapter 10, for the good of the service – in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an UD Certificate.  The memorandum also stated that the applicant's service was below the acceptable standards of the Army.  

   c.  A Separatee's Copy of Board Proceedings statement, dated 29 January 1974, wherein he requested a copy of the board proceedings.
   d.  An Expulsion from United States Military Installation letter, dated 29 January 1974, wherein he was advised of his prohibition from entering or reentering the limits of the Fort Bragg Military Reservation by law.

4.  He was discharged in pay grade E-1 accordingly on 29 January 1974.  He was credited with completing 1 year and 11 days of active service and had 937 days of time lost.  He was issued an UD Certificate.

5.  He also provided copies of the following:

* four character letters, each dated 25 February 2014, wherein the individuals attested to his outstanding post-service employment, integrity, dedication to his family and church, and being a positive role model in his community 
* Biblical quote for Matthew, chapter 6, verses 14-15

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

7.  Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel.  The regulations stated in:

   a.  Chapter 10 - a Soldier whose conduct rendered him triable by court-martial for an offense punishable by a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge could request a discharge for the good the service in lieu of a trial.  The regulation required that there have been no element of coercion involved in the submission of such a request and that the applicant was provided an opportunity to consult with counsel.  The Soldier was required to sign the request indicating he understood he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions, the adverse nature of such a discharge, and the possible consequences thereof. The regulation required that the request be forwarded through channels to the general court-martial convening authority.  A UD Certificate would normally be furnished to an individual who was discharged for the good of the service.
   
   b.  Paragraph 3-7a - an honorable discharge was a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally had met the standards of acceptance conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.

   c.  Paragraph 3-7b - a general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable condition.  When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's record is void of the facts and circumstances surrounding his 1974 discharge; however, it appears after charges were preferred against him upon his return from a lengthy period of being absent without leave and after consulting with counsel, he voluntarily, willingly, and in writing requested discharge from the Army.  Discharge actions processed under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu by court-martial.  

2.  His contention that he was young at the time was carefully considered.  He was 19 years, 4 months, and 25 days of age at the time of his enlistment in June 1970.  It appears, he was over 20 years of age at the onset of his misconduct.  There is no evidence he was any less mature than any other Soldier who successfully completed their period of enlistment.

3.  He provided no evidence or a convincing argument to show his discharge should be upgraded and his available military records contain no evidence which would entitle him to an upgrade of his UD.  The evidence shows his misconduct during his period of service sometime after June 1971 diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general or a fully honorable discharge.

4.  Without evidence to the contrary, his administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  He was properly discharged in accordance with pertinent regulations with due process.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting him 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)                                         AR20140009566





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140009566



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1