BOARD DATE: 12 February 2015
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140010488
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 that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
2. The applicant states he was drafted, had a job at home, and knew nothing about the Army or war. He did an excellent job while in the Army, receiving the National Defense Service Medal and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge).
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 was inducted on 22 May 1969, completed basic training, but failed to complete advanced individual training.
3. The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on 7 July 1969. The available record does not show what punishment he received for this absence.
4. On 6 February 1970, a special court-martial found the applicant guilty of AWOL from 27 July 1969 through 21 January 1970. His sentence included confinement from 27 January 1970 through 14 April 1970.
5. The applicant was placed in pretrial confinement on 1 December 1970.
6. On 21 December 1970, a special court-martial found the applicant guilty of AWOL from 26 April 1970 through 27 November 1970. His sentence included confinement for four months.
7. On 8 January 1971, the applicant's command initiated separation action for unfitness based on frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. The applicant acknowledged this action and waived all of his rights.
8. The separation authority approved the separation and directed the applicant receive a UD.
9. On 23 February 1971, the applicant was discharged under Army Regulation 635-212 for frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. He had 2 months and 23 days of creditable service with 558 days of lost time.
10. There is no indication the applicant applied for review of his discharge by the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statutory limit.
11. Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 6a(1) of the regulation provided that members involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness. A UD was normally considered appropriate.
12. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provides the following:
a. an HD is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldiers service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.
b. a general discharge (GD) is a separation under honorable conditions issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not so meritorious as to warrant an honorable discharge.
c. at the time of the applicant's service, a discharge under conditions other than honorable was issued when there was one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from conduct expected of a Soldier. A UD certificate was issued for a discharge under conditions other than honorable characterization of service.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant had almost 7 times more lost time than creditable service. The applicant's extremely limited creditable service cannot be described as "excellent" service. The applicant's service does not meet satisfactory standards warranting a GD much less the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty warranting an HD.
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.
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) AR20140010488
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140010488
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004646
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The separation authority could issue an honorable discharge (HD) or general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions if warranted by the member's overall record of service; however, a UD was normally considered appropriate for members...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021730
The psychiatrist recommended the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability. Given the circumstances in this case, the applicant's discharge was inequitable for the following reasons: * he served 4 years, 1 month, and 4 days of creditable service * he served in Vietnam for 1 year, 8 months, and 27 days * he was twice wounded and twice cited for meritorious service * he was promoted to SSG/E-6 in three short years * from 30 November 1966 to 7 May...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062563C070421
On 25 August 1970, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation by the Chief, Neuropsychiatry, Irwin Army Hospital, Fort Riley. Evidence of record indicates the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) in 2001. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDAR2001062563SUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDED20020423 TYPE OF DISCHARGE(UD)DATE OF DISCHARGE19700930DISCHARGE AUTHORITYAR635-212DISCHARGE REASONA51.00BOARD DECISION(DENY)REVIEW...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002851
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He completed 2 years and 4 months of creditable active service during this period and 1 year, 1 month and 23 days of prior active service. In view of all the facts and circumstances in this case, along with the evidence of record and that provided by the applicant, there is no evidence of error or injustice in his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000610C070205
Ronald D. Gant | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. _ Paul M. Smith_________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX |CASE ID |AR20060000610 | |SUFFIX | | |RECON | | |DATE BOARDED | 20060829 | |TYPE OF DISCHARGE |UD | |DATE OF DISCHARGE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016700
The applicant's DA Form 20 also shows, in item 44 (Time Lost Under Section 972, Title 10, USC), he accrued 493 days of lost time during four separate periods of AWOL and one period of confinement between 16 October 1970 and 20 July 1972. The separation authority could issue an honorable discharge (HD) or general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions if warranted by the member's overall record of service; however, a UD was normally considered appropriate for members separating under...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002141
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) currently provides the Army's enlisted administrative separation policy: a. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023125
However, there is a DD Form 214 on file that shows the applicant received a UD on 11 December 1971. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15 year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014288
On 16 June 1970, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for violating a lawful general regulation and being drunk on duty. On 29 October 1970, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed that the applicant be furnished an undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025234
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. _________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.