RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060014680 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Mr. Gerard W. Schwartz Acting Director Mr. Dean L. Turnbull Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. Paul M. Smith Chairperson Mr. David K. Haasenritter Member Mr. Edward E. Montgomery Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that as early as 1974 he was involved in treatment for secondary syphilis and that he has lived with this fact for many years. He states that he panicked and was temporarily insane for fear of being locked up in a mental institution or sanitarium for the rest of his life on   8 December 1981. 3. He states, in effect, that when he requested discharge it was because he was full of guilt, shame; was in denial, empty and lost; and he had a serious disease. He further states there was no indication that a general court-martial was contemplated by his command. He did not desire to be discharged and he would have tried to do his duty as a Soldier if he wasn't discharged. 4. The applicant provides: a. a copy of a written statement; b. a copy of a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); and c. a copy of Department of Veterans Affairs claim for various benefits. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which occurred on 28 May 1985. The application submitted in this case is dated 11 October 2006. 2. 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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. 3. The applicant’s record shows he entered active duty on 5 August 1974. He attended basic combat training and advanced individual training, and was awarded military occupational specialty 71B1O (Clerk Typist). 4. He served continuously on active duty for three years. He was honorably released from active duty on 4 August 1977. He had completed a total of 3 years of active service. His highest pay grade held while on active duty during this period was specialist/pay grade E-4. 5. On 15 April 1980, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army. 6. On 27 March 1981, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 of Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for leaving his appointed place of duty to wit: charge of quarters, and for dereliction of duty in that he willfully failed to comply with written instructions contained in the charge of quarters book and he failed to obey oral instructions from the first sergeant that he not relinquish any keys to unauthorized persons. 7. His punishment consisted of 45 days restriction, 45 days extra duty, forfeiture of $335.00 per month for two months, and reduction to private first class/pay grade E-3. 8. On 8 December 1981, the applicant's duty status changed from present for duty to absent without leave (AWOL). His records show he was dropped from the rolls of the Army on 12 January 1982 and he remained AWOL until  22 December 1984. On 26 December 1984, the applicant was returned to military control pending charges. 9. The applicant's discharge packet was not included in his records. However, the DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was reduced to private/pay grade   E-1 and was discharged under other than honorable conditions for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial on 28 May 1985. 10. He had completed a total of 2 years and 29 days of Net Active Service this period and had accrued 1109 days of time lost. 11. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of limitations. 12. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, 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 trail by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 13. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that 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 (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual. 14. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that 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 applicant requests to upgrade his under other than honorable condition discharge to an honorable discharge. 2. The evidence shows the applicant was AWOL from 8 December 1981 to  22 December 1984. As such, an under other than honorable condition discharge was equitable and proper. 3. The applicant's statement that his emotional problems because of secondary syphilis is noted. However, this is not sufficient to warrant a change to a properly issued discharge. 4. Based on his record of indiscipline, the applicant's service clearly does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. The extensive length of his AWOL renders his service unsatisfactory. Therefore, he is not entitled to either an honorable or a general discharge. 5. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement. 6. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 28 May 1985; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on  27 May 1988. The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___pms_ ___eem__ ___dkh__ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that 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. 2. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law. Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _________Paul M. Smith____________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060014680 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 20070501 TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.