BOARD DATE: 2 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016022 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: 2 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016022 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: 2 March 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150016022 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 undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. 2. The applicant states: * when he was drafted into the Army in 1969, he was a 20-year old man in the grip of alcoholism * he really enjoyed the Army but he could not free himself from the addiction and this influenced his life in a destructive way * his alcohol consumption led to an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service * his characterization of service haunts him to this day * his discharge does not really reflect who he is; he has become a better person and a good citizen who loves our country 3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), a self-authored statement, and three letters of support. 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 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 in March 1949 and he was inducted into the Army of the United States at 20 years of age on 10 April 1969. He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13A (Field Artillery Basic). 3. Following completion of MOS training, he was assigned to Fort Riley, KS. While there, he was reported in an absent without leave (AWOL) status on two separate occasions. 4. On 6 October 1969, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for being AWOL from 27 June to 20 August 1969 and from 2 to 3 September 1969. 5. On 4 November 1969, he again departed his unit in an AWOL status, and on 8 December 1969, he was dropped from Army rolls as a deserter. He ultimately returned to military control on 17 February 1970. He was placed in pre-trial confinement. 6. On 19 February 1970, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for one specification of being AWOL from 4 November 1969 to 17 February 1970. 7. On 10 March 1970, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the UCMJ, the possible effects of an undesirable discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him. Following consultation with legal counsel, he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. In his request for discharge, he indicated: * he was making this request of his own free will and had not been subjected to any coercion whatsoever by any person * he acknowledged he understood that if his discharge request were approved he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits and he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration * he acknowledged he understood he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws * he elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf 8. On 16 March 1970, the applicant's immediate and intermediate commanders recommended approval of the voluntary discharge with the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The chain of command believed his retention was neither practicable nor desired. 9. On 26 March 1970, consistent with the chain of command's recommendations, the separation authority approved the discharge action and ordered the applicant reduced to the lowest enlisted grade, if applicable, and discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 3 April 1970. 10. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under other than honorable conditions for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial (Separation Program Number (SPN) 246) under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10 and he was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He completed 6 months and 15 days of active service and he had 162 days of lost time. 11. There is no indication he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for a review of his discharge processing within that board's 15-years statute of limitations. 12. He provides a self-authored statement and three statements of support: a. In his self-authored statement, he states he was discharged from the Army with an undesirable discharge. At the time, he had a problem with alcohol. He was an alcoholic. After basic training, he was given 14 days leave. It took him 3 days just to get out of Seattle because of his drunkenness. He just could not quit. When it came to reporting back to Fort Sill, OK, he was still drunk. For a few years his life didn't amount to much. He would get job after job just to end up getting fired for not showing up. In 1970, he married his wife and they have been together for 45 years. They have wonderful and successful children. His wife convinced him into going into alcohol treatment and on his second try, it worked. He has been sober for 24 years. He has had two successful businesses of his own and a couple of fantastic jobs. He is now 66 years old and he still drives a truck. b. His wife provides a statement of support on which she states she has been married to the applicant for 45 years. They have three children. She has known him her entire life as he was a friend of her brother. His childhood was not the best as he lost his mother when he was born and lived with his dad who also drank a lot and couldn't take care of him so he went to live with extended family. He lived with them until he was in the 9th grade when they couldn't handle him anymore because of his drinking. He jumped from home to home and by then he was drinking heavily. He decided to join the Army and he really liked it until he got to come home on leave. His buddies got a hold of him and when it was time for him to go back, he was drunk and didn't go back. After they were married, he had a hard time dealing with being discharged so he tried to put it behind him by drinking for a week at a time. She worked and tried to take care of the kids and put up with his drinking until she had enough. He twice went to a treatment center and he has been sober for 24 years. It really bothers him still when the grandkids ask him if he was in the service. He tries not to talk about it, but it really hurts him. She hopes the Board can change his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. It would mean the world to him because he loves this country and all the service men/women that serve it. c. His brother provides a statement of support in which he states that the applicant has grown into a mature man. He no longer drinks alcohol. He is a good father and grandfather who loves his family and country. d. Another brother also provides a statement of support in which he states that the applicant made a foolish mistake at the time. However, he has conducted himself responsibly since his discharge. REFERENCES: AR 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 provided that a member who has committed an offense or offenses under the UCMJ 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 with no coercion by Army personnel. A medical examination was not required but could be requested by the Soldier under the provisions of AR 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness). A Soldier who requests a medical examination must also have a mental status evaluation before discharge. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate. b. Paragraph 1-14 stated that when a member was to be discharged under other than honorable conditions, the convening authority would direct an immediate reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. c. Paragraph 3-7a states 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. d. 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: 1. The applicant's record shows he was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. Discharges under the provisions of chapter 10 of AR 635-200 are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. He voluntarily, willingly, and in writing requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. 2. A review of his request for discharge shows all requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. His character of service is appropriate based on the facts of the case and his discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service. 3. Based on his record of indiscipline, his service clearly does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. His service did not meet the criteria 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) AR20150016022 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150016022 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2