IN THE CASE OF BOARD DATE: 14 August 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140000884 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 upgrade of his discharge to general. 2. The applicant states he understands what he did was wrong. At that time in his life he was young and he made a decision without thinking. He was stressed out and a newlywed. He had not taken leave for a year and missed his family. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and a 2-page statement wherein he describes what happened the evening of 24 December 1979. He was drinking and smoking hash with other Soldiers. They entered the Post Exchange after closing, the doors locked, and they were each injured jumping out a window trying to leave the store. As he was faced with the possibility of receiving a jail sentence from a court-martial, he requested a chapter 10 discharge. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provided that applications for correction of military records must be filed with 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records 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 25 May 1979. He held military occupational specialty 19E (M48-M60 A1/A3 Armor Crewman). 3. His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II) shows he arrived in Germany on 20 September 1979. The highest rank/grade he attained was private PV2/E-2. 4. His record shows he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 30 April 1980 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 14 to 15 April 1980. 5. The applicant's discharge packet is not available for review. His DD Form 214 shows, on 29 September 1980, he was separated with a discharge under conditions other than honorable, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had completed 1 year, 4 months, and 5 days of active duty service. 6. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service at any time after court-martial charges were preferred. Commanders would ensure that an individual was not coerced into submitting a request for discharge for the good of the service. Consulting counsel would advise the member concerning the elements of the offense or offenses charged, type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of Veterans Administration benefits, and the possibility of prejudice in civilian life because of the characterization of such a discharge. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally furnished to an individual who was discharged for the good of the service. 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. c. Paragraph 3-7b states 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. 7. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR. Paragraph 2-9 states the ABCMR begins 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's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge. It appears that he was charged with the commission of offense(s) punishable under the UCMJ 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 presumed to have voluntarily, willingly, and in writing, requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, he would have admitted guilt and waived his opportunity to appear before a court-martial. Furthermore, in the absence of evidence showing otherwise, the discharge process must be presumed to have been in accordance with applicable law and regulations. 2. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant an honorable or a general discharge. 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) AR20100027085 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140000884 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1