IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  17 September 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150001551 


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.

2.  He states that he volunteered to go to Vietnam.  He did his job very well and was awarded the Air Medal and Army Commendation Medal.

3.  He provides no additional evidence.

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 20 June 1966 and he was awarded military occupational specialty 36K (field wireman) upon completion of his required training.  He was honorably discharged on 24 March 1968 for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.  He reenlisted on 25 March 1968.  The highest grade he held was specialist four/pay grade (SP4/E-4).

3.  The specific facts and circumstances of his discharge proceedings are not available for review; however, his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows:

   a.  he served in Vietnam from 12 May 1968 to 8 May 1969 as a wireman assigned to Company D, 2nd Battalion, 7th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division; and 

   b.  he was absent without leave (AWOL) during the following periods:

* 23 October to 22 November 1969 (31 days)
* 23 November 1969 to 11 August 1974, dropped from the rolls (1,723 days)

4.  Special Orders Number 178, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, KY, dated 18 September 1974 show the applicant was reduced to private (PV1/E-1) in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, with an effective date of reduction of 16 September 1974.

5.  His record contains a DD Form 214 that shows on 27 September 1974, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial with an undesirable discharge.  His awards included the Air Medal and the Army Commendation Medal.

6.  He completed 3 years, 5 months, and 19 days of creditable active service.  It further shows he had 884 days lost to AWOL prior to his normal expiration term of service (ETS) and 870 days lost to AWOL subsequent to his normal ETS.

7.  The Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge on 26 February 1979 and 19 August 1992.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter provides that the applicant must have indicated that he understood that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charge(s) against him, or of a lesser included offense, that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He must have acknowledged he understood that if his discharge request was approved, he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and that he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.

	b.  An honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

	c.  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.

9.  Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR.  The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge.

2.  The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge; however, the evidence of record shows that he was AWOL for over 1,700 days.  It appears that upon his return to military control he was charged with the commission of offense(s) punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge.  Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant is further presumed to have voluntarily, willingly, and in writing, requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

3.  His service in Vietnam is noted, to include award of the Air Medal and Army Commendation Medal; however, in the absence of evidence showing otherwise, it must be presumed his discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service and that all requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

4.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any evidence that shows his discharge was in error or unjust.  On the contrary, his available record shows he did not met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel after his Vietnam service.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting him his 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)                                         AR20150001551



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150001551



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1