BOARD DATE: 29 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002836 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: 29 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002836 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 to amend the decisions of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AC84-02330, dated 12 September 1984. _____________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: 29 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002836 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 reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states: a.  At the time of his separation, he was informed he was receiving a general discharge under honorable conditions which would convert to an honorable discharge after 6 months. It has been 35 years and he is just finding out that his discharge has not converted. b.  He has been a productive part of society for the past 30 plus years and he believes he should have his discharge upgraded to honorable because of this. He served over 2 years of his duty. Regardless of this, the Army made him the man who he is today. c.  He was notified he was dishonorably discharged by the Department of Veterans Affairs and, aside from the fact that this makes him feel less than a man and just downright bad, he was told his discharge would convert to an honorable discharge after a period of time. This was obviously wrong information. d.  He probably deserved anything that came his way back then; however, the Army made him not only a man, but a good man as he stands today. Aside from a misdemeanor in 1979 and a couple of minor traffic infractions, he has been a responsible and productive part of society, working in the shipyards on government vessels with several types of clearances for 36-plus years. e.  He admits he made mistakes when he was 17 years old, but since that time he has been a model citizen, doing his best and hardest to be a good person by raising a good and God-fearing family of four young men and one daughter, and putting three of the five children through college. f.  He is not asking for any benefits whatsoever; he is just pleading and praying his discharge is upgraded to an honorable discharge. 3. The applicant provides: * Department of Veterans Affairs letter, dated 28 December 2015 * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AC84-02330 on 12 September 1984. 2. The applicant provides new arguments not previously considered that warrant consideration at this time. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 April 1977. 4. On 18 October 1978 while in the grade of E-3, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for altering an official form, a DD Form 689 (Individual Sick Slip), with intent to deceive by changing the time in from 0935 hours to 0835 hours and for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on or about 7 and 13 October 1978. He received a suspended reduction to the grade of E-2 for a period of 60 days, forfeiture of $109.00, and extra duty for 14 days. 5. On 27 October 1978, the suspension of his reduction to the grade of E-2 was vacated. 6. On 8 November 1978 while in the grade of E-2, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed. He received a suspended reduction to the grade E-1. 7. On 14 November 1978, his duty status changed from present for duty to absent without leave. 8. On 15 November 1978, the suspension of his reduction to E-1 was vacated. 9. On 27 November 1978, his duty status was changed to dropped from the unit rolls. 10. Records show he surrendered to military authorities on 2 June 1979 and his duty status was changed to present for duty. 11. On 4 June 1979, charges were preferred against him for being absent without leave on or about 27 November 1978 until on or about 2 June 1979. 12. On 7 June 1979 after consulting without counsel, he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. He freely made his request for discharge and he elected not to submit statements in his own behalf. a.  He was briefed against the widespread rumors of automatic discharge upgrades and briefed on both the Army Discharge Review Board and ABCMR, with statistics on upgraded discharges. b.  He acknowledged his guilt of the charges against him and he indicated that under no circumstances did he desire further rehabilitation and he had no desire to perform further military service. c.  He acknowledged he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished a Discharge Certificate under Other than Honorable Conditions and, as a result: * he might be deprived of many or all Army benefits * he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration * he might be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under Federal and State laws * he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life 13. On 15 June 1979, the separation authority approved his request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He directed issuance of a Discharge Certificate under Other than Honorable Conditions and reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. 14. On 26 June 1979, he was discharged accordingly. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 1 year, 7 months, and 21 days of creditable active military service and he had 197 days of lost time during the periods 14 November 1978 through 23 November 1978 and 27 November 1978 through 1 June 1979. 15. On 20 March 1984, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 16. On 12 September 1984, the ABCMR denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to honorable. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a.  Chapter 10, in effect at the time, provided that a member who had committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a bad conduct or dishonorable 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 considered appropriate. b.  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. c.  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. d. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service under conditions other than honorable. It may be issued for misconduct, fraudulent entry, security reasons, or in lieu of trial by court martial. When a Soldier is to be discharged under other than honorable conditions, the separation authority will direct an immediate reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. DISCUSSION: 1. He contends he was told he would be discharged with his service characterized as general under honorable conditions and his characterization would be upgraded to honorable in 6 months. 2. A discharge upgrade is not automatic. The U.S. Army does not now have nor has it ever had a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant requests a change to the character of his or her discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines the character of service or the reason for discharge, or both, was improper or inequitable. The evidence of record shows his counsel at the time briefed him against the widespread rumors of automatic discharge upgrades and briefed him on both the Army Discharge Review Board and ABCMR, with statistics on upgraded discharges. 3. Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 4. On 7 June 1979 after consulting without counsel, he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He indicated that under no circumstances did he desire further rehabilitation and he had no desire to perform further military service. Further, he acknowledged he understood he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and the effects associated with such a discharge. 5. All requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002836 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002836 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2