BOARD DATE: 8 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001568 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: 8 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001568 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: 8 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001568 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 general under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 2. The applicant states he was not informed of the reason he received a general under honorable conditions discharge. He was told to sign some papers then he could go home with an honorable discharge and that it would be completely honorable in 90 days; therefore he signed the papers to go home early and to go to school. 3. The applicant provides a letter of support from the EverSharp Veterans Inc. Referral Services Homeless Program and his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty). 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 3 April 1972. 3. He accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on three occasions for the following offenses: * Absent from his place of duty from 0745 to 1255 hours on 8 November 1973 * Absent without leave (AWOL) from on or about 3 to 5  November 1973 * AWOL from on or about 15 to 20 November 1973 * AWOL from on or about 13 to 22 February 1974 * AWOL from on or about 0730 to 1700 hours on 4 April 1974 * AWOL from on or about 0730 to 1200 hours on 23 April 1974 4. On 2 May 1974, he was barred from reenlisting because of his repeated offenses, including being late for formations, not following orders, shirking responsibility and problems with drug abuse. 5. On 19 July 1974, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of three specifications of failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and for being AWOL from on or about 21 to 28 May 1974. His punishment consisted of performance of hard labor without confinement for 30 days and forfeiture of $215.00 pay. 6. His discharge proceedings are not available. However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 12 September 1974 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 13-5a(3) (unfitness – drug abuse) with a characterization of service of under honorable conditions (general) and issuance of a DD Form 257A (General Discharge Certificate). He completed 2 years, 4 months, and 12 days of active military service with 28 days of lost time. 7. He provided a letter of support dated 16 December 2015 from the Executive Director, EverSharp Veterans Inc., who described him as an honorable veteran of great humility with a caring attitude. The Executive Director stated the applicant continues to support EverSharp Veterans Inc. by helping veterans. He is actively involved with his church and community, and he is an asset both to this organization and his community. 8. On 15 May 1980, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 13-5a(3) provided for discharge for unfitness due to drug abuse. An individual separated by reason of unfitness was to be furnished an undesirable discharge, except that an honorable or general discharge could be issued if the individual had been awarded a personal decoration or if warranted by the particular circumstances in the case. When the sole reason for separation was drug abuse, the individual would be furnished an honorable or general discharge as warranted by the particular circumstances in the case. The type of discharge was to be directed by the convening authority. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant's record is void of any evidence corroborating his claim that he was told his discharge would be automatically upgraded to honorable within 90 days. The U.S. Army does not have nor has it ever had a policy to automatically upgrade upgrades. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge were improper or inequitable. 2. The applicant's service record shows he received three Article 15s, one conviction by a summary court-martial, and a bar to reenlistment. 3. Although the applicant's discharge packet is not available for review, it is presumed the separation authority appropriately directed the issuance of a general discharge based on his overall record of service and the separation action was processed in accordance with the governing regulation. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160001568 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160001568 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2