IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 18 February 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150004800 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 to a general discharge. 2. The applicant states: a. During his enlistment, he went through some mental health issues. b. He was recommended for a general discharge from a mental health doctor at Fort Hood, Texas. c. His battalion commander refused to sign his recommendation for discharge. d. At the time of his discharge he was unable to see a doctor. 3. The applicant provides * DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) * Army Review Boards Agency letter, dated 20 April 2015 * Copies of his Arizona Department of Corrections medical records 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 enlisted in the Army on 28 November 1984. He completed training as a materiel storage and handling specialist. 3. His records show he went absent without leave (AWOL) on 23 September 1986 and he remained absent until 26 September 1986. 4. The applicant went AWOL again on 22 June 1988 and he remained absent until he returned to military control on 22 January 1989. 5. On 22 January the applicant declined to have a separation medical examination. 6. On 24 January 1989, the applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for being AWOL from 22 June 1988 until 22 January 1989. He acknowledged receipt of the notification and after consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. 7. On 9 February 1989, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's request and directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. 8. On 29 March 1989, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He completed 3 years, 8 month, and 29 days of net active service this period. He was discharged under other than honorable conditions. 9. The applicant provides copies of his Arizona Department of Corrections medical records, dated from 2013 through 2015. These records show he has been diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, for which he is taking medication. However, a review of his official Army medical records fails to show that he was recommended for discharge by a mental health professional while he was in the Army. 10. Further review of the available records does not show that he ever petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge. 11. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 states 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, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate at the time of the applicant’s discharge. b. Paragraph 3-7a states 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 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 AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions have been noted. However, his contentions are not supported by any evidence of record. 2. His records do not show that he was recommended for a discharge by a mental health professional while he was in the Army. His records do show he had charges pending against him for being AWOL from 22 June 1988 until 22 January 1989. His records also show that he declined to have a separation medical examination prior to his discharge. 3. He submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The appropriate authority directed the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. 4. The type of discharge he received appropriately reflects his overall record of service. Considering the nature of his offenses the type of discharge he received was not too severe. His service did not rise to the level of a general or an honorable 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 that 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) AR20150004800 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150004800 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1