BOARD DATE: 5 May 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007918 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: 5 May 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007918 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: 5 May 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007918 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge. 2. The applicant states during his Desert Storm deployment he was subjected to unjust physical and mental harm by the medical unit assigned to his company. He was hurt and unable to walk for over 1 month. The medical staff and his assigned unit refused to send him for a medical assessment to determine the extent of his injury. The suffering and mental trauma he incurred was unreasonable. When he returned stateside he chose to abandon his unit. He was captured and returned to military control for court-martial. His unit treated him unfairly. He did not know who he could turn to for help so he ran. At the time of his discharge he was in an unstable frame of mind and he didn't know how to deal with the situation. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence. 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 the cases 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. 2. The applicant enlisted in the South Carolina Army National Guard (ARNG) on 18 November 1983. He entered active duty for training (ADT) on 13 February 1984. He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 63S (heavy wheel vehicle mechanic). He was released from ADT on 30 June 1984 and was returned to his ARNG unit. 3. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 October 1989, for 4 years. He held MOS 63S. He served in Saudi Arabia from 29 September 1990 through 20 April 1991. The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-4. 4. His record is void of the complete facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge; however, his records contain: a. Orders Number 254-123, dated 22 October 1991, reducing him from pay grade E-4 to pay grade E-1 effective 17 October 1991. b. A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged on 25 October 1991 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. He was credited with completing 1 year, 8 months, and 16 days of net active service this period and 119 days of lost time from 13 May 1991 to 11 September 1991. His service was characterized as under other than honorable conditions. 5. There is no evidence he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitation for an upgrade of his discharge. 6. On 25 August 2015, the Army Review Boards Agency requested the applicant provide medical documents which supported his claim of a mental health condition. He did not respond. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. The regulation stated in: a. Chapter 10 – a member who had committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request for a 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 include the individual’s admission of guilt. The Soldier was required to sign the request indicating he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and the results of the issuance of such a discharge. Although an honorable or general discharge was authorized, an under other than honorable conditions discharge was normally considered appropriate. b. Paragraph 3-7a – an honorable discharge was a separation with honor. The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally had met the standards of acceptance conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate. c. Paragraph 3-7b - a general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable condition. When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant's record is void of the complete facts and circumstances surrounding his 1991 discharge; however, it appears after charges were preferred against him and after consulting with counsel, he voluntarily, willingly, and in writing requested discharge from the Army. Discharge actions processed under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 2. There is no evidence of record and he provided none to show a mental health condition caused his unsatisfactory performance. He also provided no evidence or a convincing argument to show his discharge should be upgraded and his military records contain no evidence which would qualify him for an upgrade of his discharge. The characterization of his 1991 discharge was commensurate with the reason for discharge in accordance with the governing regulation in effect at the time. 3. Without evidence to the contrary, his administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. His service did not rise to the level required for an honorable or a general discharge. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150007918 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150007918 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2