BOARD DATE:	  26 March 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140014687 


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 his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

2.  The applicant states he was too young and immature to have served properly when his grandmother signed for him to enlist.  He is now 57 years old and wishes to have the record changed.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting documentation.

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 at age 17 on 18 October 1974.  The file copy of a parental consent form lists his mother and step-father but the parental signature block is blank.  

3.  The applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) on five occasions –

* 7 – 19 January 1975 (13 days)
* 21 – 28 January 1975 (8 days)
* 29 January 1975 – 6 February 1975 (9 days)
* 19 March 1975 – 21 September 1976 (553 days)  

4.  The record shows his last period of AWOL ended as a result of apprehension by Federal authorities and is recorded as AWOL in desertion from 18 April 1975.

5.  On 1 October 1975, general court-martial charges were preferred for two periods of AWOL under Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) (23 January 1975 and 29 January 1975 – 6 February 1975) and one period of AWOL in desertion under Article 85, UCMJ (19 March 1975 – 21 September 1976).

6.  On 1 October 1975, after consulting with counsel and being advised of his rights and options, the applicant submitted a formal request, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 10, for discharge for the good of the service (in lieu of trial by court-martial for an offense punishable by a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge).  He acknowledged that, if the request was accepted, he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and be furnished a UD Certificate.  He acknowledged that such a discharge would deprive him of many or all of his benefits as a veteran, and that he could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received a UD.  

7.  The discharge authority accepted the applicant's request for discharge and directed he be discharged with a UD.

8.  The applicant was discharged with a UD on 29 October 1976.  His DD Form 214 was prepared based on temporary records.  It shows he had 5 months and 7 days of creditable service with 583 days of lost time and 25 days in excess leave.




9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It provides the following:

   a.  Paragraph 3-7a states that an HD is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty.  
   
	b.  Paragraph 3-7b states that 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 HD. 

	c.  Paragraph 3-7c states that a UOTHC discharge is issued when there is one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from conduct expected of a Soldier.  

   d.  Chapter 10 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.  A UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.   However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

2.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows his lost time incorrectly.  His actual lost time is a total of 596 days; a period almost four times greater than his period of creditable service. 

3.  The applicant's limited period of creditable service is not shown to have been so meritorious as to warrant a GD much less to have met the standards for an HD. 

4.  The mere passage of time is insufficient in and of itself to warrant a change of the applicant's discharge, especially in light of the fact that his military record is devoid of significant service.

5.  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.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

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)                                         AR20140014687



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140014687



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1