BOARD DATE: 24 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002924 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: 24 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002924 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: 24 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002924 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 his discharge under other than honorable conditions should be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He also requests the narrative reason for separation be changed to “disability (medical), due to alcoholism.” 2. The applicant states he had a problem with alcohol when he was in the military, which is considered a disease. He was not given the help he needed when he served nor was he given help upon his discharge. He couldn’t even get medical assistance. 3. The applicant provides: * two DD Forms 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) * two letters, dated 27 December 2013 and 1 April 2014, from the National Personnel Records Center, St. Louis, MO 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. On 1 April 1980, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupation specialty 11B (Infantryman). 3. A DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action) shows the applicant's status changed on/from: * 7 October 1980 – present for duty to absent without leave (AWOL) * 8 November 1980 – dropped from unit rolls to present for duty * 8 December 1980 – present for duty to AWOL * 9 December 1980 – AWOL to present for duty * 8 January 1981 – present for duty to confined by military authorities 4. There is no charge sheet in the applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket and his separation processing packet is not available for review. 5. On 3 March 1981, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) for conduct triable by court-martial. He completed 10 months and 1 day of net active service that was characterized as under other than honorable conditions. He had 52 days of time lost. 6. There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within the ADRB's 15-year statute of limitations. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 stated that a member who had committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial at any time after the charges have been preferred. The request must include the Soldier's acknowledgement that the Soldier understood the elements of the offense(s) charged and that the Soldier was guilty of the charge(s) or of a lesser included offense therein contained which also authorized the imposition of a punitive discharge. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate. b. An honorable discharge was a separation with honor and entitled the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization was appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally had met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or was otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would have been clearly inappropriate. c. A general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it was issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. 2. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. DISCUSSION: 1. Although the applicant's separation package is not available for review by this Board, in order to be discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, charges would have been preferred against him for an offense for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge. He would have been required to consult with defense counsel and to voluntarily and in writing request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant would have admitted he was guilty of the offenses he was charged with and acknowledged that he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions. 2. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that all requirements of law and regulations were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process and the type of discharge and the reason for separation were appropriate. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. The characterization of service he received was commensurate with the reason for this 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) AR20160002924 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002924 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2