IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 February 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007489 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: * following his release from confinement, he voluntarily asked to be discharged with the understanding that he would receive a general discharge * he received a "bad" discharge after serving in confinement * he feels his discharge is wrong 3. The applicant provides two email messages dated 1 and 2 April 2015. 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 Regular Army on 26 June 1974 for a period of 2 years. He trained as an infantryman and he was honorably discharged on 28 March 1976 for immediate reenlistment. He reenlisted on 29 March 1976 for a period of 6 years. 3. In August 1980, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for making a fraudulent claim and false statement. 4. His records are void of the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge action. However, his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 23 December 1981 shows he was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, due to frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. He completed a total of 7 years, 3 months, and 28 days of creditable active service with 60 days of lost time. 5. There is no evidence that shows he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. 6. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. b. 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 AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that his separation processing was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. Without the discharge packet to consider, it is presumed the authority and reason for his separation for the period ending 23 December 1981 was commensurate with his overall record of service. 2. There is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant’s requested relief. 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) AR20150007489 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150007489 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1