Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9705615
Original file (9705615.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He states, in effect, he went AWOL due to a personality disorder brought on by Operation Just Cause in Panama, and that he is really a good soldier.
PURPOSE : To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

 EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 June 1989, and was discharged under conditions other than honorable on 1 May 1990. He had 3 years of prior honorable active service.

Court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for AWOL and several incidents of misconduct.

On 19 April 1990 he requested discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, to avoid trial. He received counsel and acknowledged he understood he may be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He also acknowledged he understood as a result of the issuance of such a discharge he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the VA and may be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.

The appropriate authority approved his request and directed that he be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on
1 May 1990 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. He was credited with 9 months, and 27 days total active service and 15 days lost time for AWOL and confinement.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that 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 inappropriate.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. However, at the time of the applicant's separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

 Army Regulation 15-180 provides for petitioning the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of the characterization or the reason and authority for discharge, or both. Application may be made with DD Form 293 (Application for Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States), within 15 years after the date of discharge or dismissal.
Under these provisions the applicant may still petition the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge.

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. Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

 DISCUSSION : The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 1 May 1990, the date of discharge. The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 1 May 1993.

The application is dated 11 December 1996 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.

 DETERMINATION : The subject application was not submitted within the time required. The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law.

 BOARD VOTE :
________ ________ ________ EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

 ________ ________ ________ CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION



                  Loren G. Harrell
                  Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9705615C070209

    Original file (9705615C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 1 May 1990 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Army Regulation 15-180 provides for petitioning the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of the characterization or the reason and authority for discharge, or both.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100818C070212

    Original file (2004100818C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has determined that the 3 year limit on filing to the Army Board for Correction of Military...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707486C070209

    Original file (9707486C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether he application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707486

    Original file (9707486.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether he application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 29 October 1974 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050002103C070206

    Original file (20050002103C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 February 1973, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be issued an undesirable discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 22 March 1973 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service. The applicant’s record of service included five nonjudicial punishments and 171 days of lost time.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707509C070209

    Original file (9707509C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to honorable. He received counsel and acknowledged he understood he may be discharged under conditions other than honorable and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 15-180 provides for petitioning the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of the characterization or the reason and authority for discharge, or both.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707509

    Original file (9707509.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received counsel and acknowledged he understood he may be discharged under conditions other than honorable and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 8 November 1973 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002690C070205

    Original file (20060002690C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The separation authority denied the applicant's request for discharge and returned his case for a court-martial. On 10 October 1974, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an undesirable discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions with an undesirable discharge on 1 November 1974 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015734

    Original file (20110015734.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant military record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 November 1987. On 27 July 1990, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in the lowest enlisted grade with an UOTHC discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004037C070205

    Original file (20060004037C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant also states that his undesirable discharge should be upgraded to honorable for the following reasons: (1) clemency is warranted because it is an injustice for him to continue to suffer the adverse consequences of a bad discharge; (2) under current standards, he would not receive the type of discharge he did; (3) his average conduct and efficiency ratings/behavior and proficiency marks were good; (4) he received awards, decorations, and letters of commendation; (5) he had combat...