BOARD DATE: 3 June 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130017802 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 the characterization of his release from active duty (REFRAD) be changed from under honorable conditions to honorable. 2. He states his under honorable conditions REFRAD was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident during his service. He had honorable service after his REFRAD. 3. The applicant provides a copy of a 17 September 2013 DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States). 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 28 May 1963. He held military occupational specialty (MOS) 64A (Light Vehicle Driver). 3. On 18 March 1965, he was convicted by a special court-martial, in accordance with his plea, of violation of Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 7 October to 16 December 1964. He was sentenced to confinement for 3 months. 4. On 27 April 1965, he was convicted by a special court-martial, in accordance with his plea, of being AWOL from 7 February to 30 March 1965. He was again sentenced to confinement for 3 months. 5. His record shows he accepted nonjudicial (NJP) punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ on 5 June 1965 for being AWOL from 1 June to 3 June 1965. 6. His DD Form 214 shows he was REFRAD with a characterization of service of under honorable conditions on 7 December 1965 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) due to expiration of his term of service. He had completed 2 years of total active duty service with 194 days of lost time. 7. He was honorably discharged from the U.S. Army Reserve effective 30 April 1969. 8. There is no indication the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge. 9. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) provides detailed instructions for completing separation documents, including the DD Form 214.  It provides that the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge. The DD Form 214 is not intended to have any legal effect on termination of a Soldier's service. 10. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) provides that: a. The characterization of service will be determined solely by the military record during the current enlistment or period of service, plus any extension thereof, from which the Soldier is being separated. b. 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 or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. Contrary to the applicant's assertion, the characterization of his REFRAD was not based on an isolated incident, but on repeated acts of misconduct -- conviction by two special courts-martial and one NJP, all for AWOL. His DD Form 214 shows a total of 194 days of lost time. 2. The applicant has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he requests. Considering his record of misconduct, the applicant not entitled to a change in the characterization of service of his REFRAD. 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 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) AR20110020828 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130017802 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1