BOARD DATE: 2 February 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007194 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 his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions. 2. The applicant states he would like to participate in the Veterans Retraining Assistance Program in order to better himself as a U.S. citizen. 3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with a separation date of 2 March 1983. 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. On 8 January 1980, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. 3. He received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on: * 16 May 1981 for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 20 - 23 April 1981 and from 27 April - 12 May 1981 * 12 August 1981 for two specifications of failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty 4. On 11 January 1982, he was assigned to the 364th Supply and Service Company at Fort Bragg, NC. 5. On 11 January 1983, court-martial charges were preferred against him for being AWOL from the 364th Supply and Service Company from on or about 7 May 1982 to 8 January 1983. 6. On 12 June 1983, he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel). He acknowledged he understood the offense he was charged with and he was: * making the request of his own free will * guilty of the offense with which he was charged * not submitting statements in his own behalf * afforded the opportunity to speak with counsel prior to making this request * advised he may be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate 7. In addition, the applicant was advised he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and he: * would be deprived of many or all Army benefits * could be ineligible for many or all Veterans Administration (VA) benefits 8. On 12 January 1983, the applicant was interviewed by Major (MAJ) W____. a. The applicant was aware of the nature of the nature of the interview and the consequences of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. b. The applicant stated his approximate 246 days of AWOL were due to family problems. He was having trouble paying bills and feeding his family with his military pay. Pressures within his unit caused him to drink and this led to additional problems so he departed AWOL. c. He was apprehended by civil authorities on 7 January 1983 in Madison, NC. He stated the military interfered with his life style and he desired to be discharged from the service d. MAJ W____ recommended in view of the applicant's attitude toward the military and his lack of rehabilitative potential that he be discharged from the service under other than honorable conditions. 9. The applicant's intermediate commander recommended approval of his chapter 10 request. He stated that the nature, gravity, and circumstances surrounding the offense are sufficiently serious to warrant elimination from the service. He recommended issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. 10. On 15 February 1983, the appropriate authority approved his request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200. He directed the applicant be reduced to private/pay grade E-1 and that his service be characterized as under other than honorable conditions. 11. On 2 March 1983, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had completed 1 year, 5 months, and 6 days of net active service that was characterized as under other than honorable conditions. He had 264 days of time lost. 12. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 stated a member who was charged with 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 in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request could be submitted at any time after charges had been preferred and must have included the individual's admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally issued to an individual who was discharged for the good of the service. b. A general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. He voluntarily requested discharge and admitted guilt to the offense for which he was charged. He also acknowledged that he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that as a result he could be ineligible for many or all Army benefits to include benefits administered by the VA. 2. The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. 3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. The records contain no evidence of procedural or other errors that would have jeopardized his rights. 4. He received NJP on two occasions. He had a total of 264 days of time lost. His last period of AWOL was 246 days and he was apprehended by civil authorities, thereby raising the question as to his intent to return to military jurisdiction of his own volition. His period of service is considered unsatisfactory. 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) AR20150007194 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150007194 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1