BOARD DATE:	  4 August 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140020948 


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:

The applicant requests his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.

2.  He states he entered the U.S. Army at the age of 17.  He adds he was an alcoholic, stupid, and not prone to taking orders.  He admits that what happened to him was his fault.  He states he got over his alcoholism and stupidity and worked for the Sheriff's Department for 10 years.

3.  The applicant provides:

* Self-authored statement
* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge)
* Congressional correspondence

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 28 October 1965 at the age of 17.

3.  His disciplinary history includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on
8 February 1967 for failing to go to his appointed place of duty on 8 February 1967.

4.  On 2 August 1967, he was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 12 March to 3 July 1967.  The court sentenced him to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of $64.00 per month for 6 months.  

5.  On 2 November 1967, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation at the Mental Hygiene Consultation Division, Fort Knox, KY.  The psychiatrist stated that the applicant was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, and able to adhere to the right.  Additionally, he had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative separation actions.  The psychiatrist also stated that he found no evidence of underlying, previously unrecognized, medically disqualifying emotional illness.  He was subsequently cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the command. 

6.  On 7 November 1967, he was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 4 August to 17 October 1967.  The court sentenced him to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of $64.00 per month for 
6 months.  

7.  On 17 November 1967, the Commander, U.S. Army Special Processing Detachment, Fort Knox, KY recommended the applicant be eliminated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations – Discharge – Unfitness and Unsuitability) for unfitness.  He cited the applicant's two periods of AWOL, two periods of confinement, having been dropped from the rolls as a deserter, two convictions by courts-martial, and one Article 15 as the basis for his recommendation.

8.  The applicant consulted with military counsel.  After being advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, its effects, and the rights available to him, he waived his right to consideration of his case by a board of officers, to a personal appearance before a board of officers, and to counsel.  He also elected not to submit statements on his behalf.

9.  He acknowledged he understood that he may be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate, that he may be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he may be ineligible for many or all Veterans Administration benefits, and that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he was issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

10.  On 24 November 1967, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness with the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

11.  On 27 November 1967, the unexecuted portion of the applicant's sentence to confinement at hard labor for 6 months concerning both courts-martial was remitted effective the date of his administrative discharge.     

12.  His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 1 December 1967 and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  The reason and authority for discharge was listed as Army Regulation 635-212.  He completed 1 year, 4 months, and 13 days of total active service with 260 days of lost time.

13.  The applicant's record is void of any evidence that shows he was an alcoholic or that he sought treatment for alcohol abuse.

14.  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.

15.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the elimination of enlisted personnel for unsuitability and unfitness.  Paragraph 6 provided that an individual was subject to separation for unfitness because of frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit-forming drugs or marijuana, and established pattern of shirking one’s responsibilities. When separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

16.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The records show the applicant was 17 years of age at the time of his enlistment and 19 years of age at the time of his discharge.  There is no evidence that indicates he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.  Therefore, his contention that his age led to his indiscipline is not sufficient as a basis for upgrading his discharge.

2.  Additionally, he argues that his discharge should be upgraded because he was an alcoholic and he has since turned his life around.   There is no evidence in the records that shows the applicant had a drinking problem during his military service and/or he sought counseling to correct this problem.  In fact, the psychiatrist stated that he found no evidence of underlying, previously unrecognized, medically disqualifying emotional illness and he was subsequently cleared for separation.  Therefore, his contention that his drinking led to his indiscipline is not sufficient as a basis for upgrading his discharge.

3.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was separated for "unfitness" as recommended by the commander of the Special Processing Detachment for two periods of AWOL, two periods of confinement, being dropped from the rolls as a deserter, two convictions by courts-martial, and one Article 15.  Additionally, as stated in Army Regulation 635-212, when separation for unfitness was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.  

4.  The available evidence indicates that all requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.  The record further shows his discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.

5.  Based on this record of indiscipline, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct rendered his service unsatisfactory and his discharge as shown is appropriate considering his record. 

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)                                         AR20140020948





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140020948



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1