BOARD DATE: 8 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002611 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 BOARD DATE: 8 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002611 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. BOARD DATE: 8 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002611 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 under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) to honorable. 2. The applicant states he ended up in a unit with no guns when he reported to Fort Polk. He was given every undesirable duty the post had to offer. He requested a transfer, but was told he was a specialist and was needed there. Morale was low, drug use was rampant, and he just snapped when he got a suicide letter from his girlfriend. He didn't volunteer for that. He doesn't want to die with a "chapter 10" discharge. As a young man, he meant well, but was given a bad deal. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty). 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 born on 31 December 1958. At age 17, he enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 September 1976 for a period of 3 years. He completed his training and was awarded military occupational specialty 13E (Cannon Fire Direction/Fire Support Specialist). 3. On 23 May 1977, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for possessing marijuana. 4. He was absent without leave (AWOL) from 5 July 1977 to 13 September 1977. On 13 September 1977, charges were preferred against him for the AWOL period. 5. On 13 September 1977, he consulted with counsel and 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. He acknowledged that by submitting his request for discharge he was guilty of a charge against him that authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He indicated he understood he might be discharged under conditions other than honorable and given a Discharge Certificate UOTHC, he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, he might be deprived of many or all Army benefits, and he might be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws. He acknowledged he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of a Discharge Certificate UOTHC. He elected to make a statement in his own behalf. In summary, he stated he entered the service because he was out of work and wanted to get married. He was AWOL because he couldn't get along with his fellow Soldiers, he was being harassed by his senior noncommissioned officers, and he wasn't doing the job he signed up for. He doesn't like the Army because people in the military have sick minds and no one in a higher rank will listen to you. He wants to get out of the Army because he can't handle living and working with these people. He would be AWOL again if returned to duty. 6. On 17 October 1977, the separation authority approved his voluntary request for discharge and directed the issuance of a discharge UOTHC. 7. On 27 October 1977, he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He completed 9 months and 20 days of creditable active service with 104 days of lost time. His service was characterized as UOTHC. 8. On 3 October 1985, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate. 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 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. DISCUSSION: 1. Although the applicant was 17 years of age when he enlisted, there is no evidence indicating he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their military terms of service. 2. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, and his service was characterized as UOTHC. 3. His voluntary request for separation for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. 4. His brief record of service included one nonjudicial punishment and 104 days of lost time. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002611 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002611 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2