IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  12 February 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140010077 


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, in effect, an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.

2.  The applicant states he was in the top of his training platoon and was never written-up for anything.  He started having mental issues while in advanced individual training (AIT) and saw a psychiatrist who said he should be sent home.  When the first sergeant heard this he started making threats of physical harm and told the applicant to get off his base.  No one tried to stop him from leaving.  After going home he decided to return to Fort Gordon, Georgia.  He went to MacDill Air Force Base, Florida and asked for transportation, but Fort Gordon refused to take him back.  The assertion that he did not get along with blacks is wrong.  He was never in trouble with any blacks in his platoon.  His roommate was black and a great friend. 

3.  The applicant provides a DD Form 293 (Application for Review of Discharge) which essentially duplicates the information on the DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Records)

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 14 March 1978 and entered one site unit training at Fort Gordon.  

3.  His complete military medical records are available for review.  Other than routine physical examinations and immunizations, they show only a 10 April 1978 hospitalization for a viral upper respiratory infection with release to full duty with medication on 13 April 1978.

4.  The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) as of 0430 hours on 11 May 1978.  His parents were informed by mail that he was AWOL.  

5.  A letter to the applicant’s home of record, dated 28 September 1982, summarized his military record and stated he was in a state of desertion and eligible for a discharge in absentia.  He was advised that his discharge would be UOTHC and he was given 45 days to respond.  No response was noted in his record.  

6.  A DA Form 3836 (Notice of Return of U.S. Army Member from Unauthorized Absence) indicates he was discharged on 13 September 1983 and no longer sought by the Army.

7.  On 13 September 1983 the applicant was discharged UOTHC under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 chapter for misconduct by desertion.  He had 1,398 days lost time.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Administrative Separations) provides the policies and procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel.  At that time, Chapter 14 provided that an individual could be discharged for desertion or AWOL either before or after return to military control if:

	a.  The preponderance of the evidence supported the determination of desertion or AWOL;

	b.  if the AWOL was continuous for 1 year or longer;

	c.  retention was precluded by regulation or not considered desirable or in the national interest; and

	d.  trial was waived or deemed inadvisable or;

		(1)  trial resulted in dismissal upon review or;

		(2)  the individual succeeded in pleading, pled the statute of limitations.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant performed no worthwhile service.  His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

 2.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

3.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of the request.

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)                                         AR20140010077



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140010077



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1