| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Stephanie Thompkins | Analyst |
| Mr. John N. Slone | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Margaret V. Thompson | Member | |
| Mr. William D. Powers | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to honorable. He states that he was in the military for 4 years, served well and was never in trouble. He found a camera and was accused of stealing it, other than that his service was honorable.
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 as a private, pay grade E-1 on 10 November 1981.
He was reported absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit from 15 April to 10 May 1982.
On 11 June 1982, a special court-martial convened and charged the applicant of one specification of AWOL from 15 April to 11 May 1982 and one specification of stealing a camera of another soldier. He pleaded guilty to the charges.
He was found guilty of all the charges. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 4 months, forfeiture of pay for 6 months and discharge with a BCD.
Upon completion of his confinement he was placed in excess leave status on 14 June 1982 pending appellant review. His sentence was approved on 21 July 1982.
He was discharged with a BCD under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-11, as a result of court-martial on 22 March 1983.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 3-11, of this regulation, in effect at the time, provided for the separation of personnel with an approved sentence to a BCD, after completion of the appellate review and after the sentence had been affirmed.
Paragraph 3-7 of this regulation provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. 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.
The presumption of regularity applies in this case. The records are presumed correct and the applicant has the burden to show otherwise.
Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, as amended, precludes any action by this Board that would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction.
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 22 March 1983, the date of his discharge. The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 22 March 1986.
The application is dated 28 March 2001 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. Prior to reaching this determination the Board looked at the applicant's entire file. It was only after all aspects of the case had been considered and it had been concluded that there was no basis to recommend a correction of his record that the Board considered the statute of limitations. Had the Board determined that an error or injustice existed it would have recommended relief in spite of the applicant's failure to submit the application within the three-year time limit.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__mvt___ __jns___ _wdp____ CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION
| CASE ID | AR2001055877 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20010724 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010060
In accordance with The Military Justice Act of 1983 (Public Law 98-209) and Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to change a discharge due to matters which should have been raised in the appellate process, rather it is only empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial process and then only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000441
The available records show the applicant was 18 years of age at the time of his enlistment and 20 years and 6 months old at the time of discharge. There is no evidence that indicates he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and his discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007925C070205
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 Records (ABCMR) should commence on the date of final action by the ADRB. He was discharged pursuant to sentence of a special...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005294
He states he was locked up for four months and given a BCD because they thought he had lied. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant a general discharge under honorable conditions. _______ _ 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004645
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show his discharge date as April 1985 instead of 22 August 1983. He was confined by military authorities from 3 February to 21 April 1983. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055013C070420
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 the 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 applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The time for the applicant to file a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022028
The applicant requests, in effect, upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to an honorable discharge. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants 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. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations -...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028323
The applicant provides: * a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period 1 April 1981 to 3 October 1983 showing he was honorably released from active duty [Item 18 (Remarks) shows the DD Form 214 was administratively issued on 28 May 2003] * a DD Form 214 for the period 28 June 1977 to 2 May 2003 showing he was discharged due to court-martial, other CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000349
On 22 June 1983, the U.S. Army Court of Military Review set aside the guilty finding of wrongfully appropriating U.S. currency of a value of $50.00, the property of another Soldier, and affirmed only so much of the sentence as provided for a BCD and confinement at hard labor for 2 months. A review of the available records does not show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120013892
The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The evidence of record shows he was convicted by a special court-martial which was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged at the time. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and his discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.