IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150011512 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x____ ___x____ ___x ____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150011512 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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 June 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150011512 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 discharge. 2. He states he needs his discharge upgraded to receive veteran’s benefits. 3. He provides his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), effective 14 July 1993. 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. Prior to the period of service under review the applicant had an honorable period of Regular Army (RA) service from 16 June 1989 to 8 November 1992. During the period of service under review, he served in Southwest Asia from 15 September1990 to 10 April 1991. 3. He reenlisted in the RA on 9 November 1992. During both periods of service he held military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman). 4. On 6 April 1993, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 17 December 1992 until 31 March 1993. 5. On 6 April 1993, after consulting with counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. In doing so, he acknowledged: * he had not been coerced with respect to his request for discharge * by requesting this discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charges against him * he understood he could be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) characterization of service and the results of the issuance of such a discharge, and that he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) 6. He waived his rights and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. 7. On 23 June 1993, the separation authority approved his request for discharge and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 8. On 14 July 1993, he was discharged accordingly. He completed a total of 3 years, 9 months, and 15 days of creditable active military service and he had 97 days of lost time. 9. There is no indication in his records that he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15 year statute of limitations. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 provides that the applicant must have indicated 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 VA, and that he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws. 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. DISCUSSION: 1. 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 was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout his discharge processing. His record shows he was well advised and fully aware of the consequences of his decision. 2. His administrative discharge was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150011512 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150011512 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2