Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100027C070208
Original file (2004100027C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          19 AUGUST 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004100027


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Gale J. Thomas                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Fred Eichorn                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Curtis Greenway               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. William Powers                |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected by
upgrading his discharge.

2.  The applicant states, that he has been out of the military for 15 years
and has been living a productive and drug free life, and needs his
discharge upgraded so that he can join the police force.

3.  The applicant provides no evidence in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on
9 September 1988.  The application submitted in this case is dated 20
November 2003.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 February
1984, and was honorably discharged on 6 February 1987.  He reenlisted in
the Regular Army on 24 April 1987, for a period of 3 years.

4.  On 27 October 1987, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the
provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for being
disrespectful to a commissioned officer.  His punishment was reduction,
restriction, extra duty and a forfeiture of pay.

5.  On 21 April 1988, he accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15,
UCMJ for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 15 April 1988 to 18 April
1988.  His punishment was reduction, restriction, extra duty, and a
forfeiture of pay.

6.  On 1 August 1988, he accepted NJP under the provisions of Article, UCMJ
for the wrongful use of cocaine.  His punishment was reduction,
restriction, extra duty, and a forfeiture of pay.

7.  On 17 August 1988, a Mental Status Evaluation cleared the applicant for
separation.

8.  On 19 August 1988, a medical examination cleared the applicant for
separation.

9. On 30 August 1988, the applicant was notified by his commander that he
was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions
of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct, commission of a
serious offense, cocaine.

10.  On 30 August 1988, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant
acknowledged that he had been advised of the basis for his commander’s
intent to separate him for misconduct.   He further acknowledged that he
understood that if he received a general, under honorable conditions
discharge he may encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.

11.  On 30 August 1988, his commander recommended his elimination from the
service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, with
an under honorable conditions discharge.

12.  On 31 August 1988, his intermediate commander recommended approval of
his separation with the issuance of a general discharge.

13.  On 5 September 1988, the appropriate separation authority approved the
applicant’s discharge, and directed the issuance of a general discharge.

14.  On 9 September 1988, the applicant was discharged under the provisions
of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct.  His DD Form 214
(Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) indicates he had 1
year,
4 months, and 16 days of active service.

15.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and
prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific
categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct,
commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil authorities, desertion
or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for
misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is
impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in
compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural
errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were
appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in
error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would
satisfy that requirement.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 9 September 1988; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
8 September 1991.  However, the applicant did not file within the 3-year
statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or
evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___FE __  ___CG __  ___WP__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.






2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




            _____Fred Eichorn________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004100027                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040819                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001830C070205

    Original file (20060001830C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge authority approved the discharge recommendation and directed that the applicant’s service be characterized as under honorable conditions. The applicant was discharged with a GD under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c for misconduct – abuse of illegal drugs. At the time of his enlistment the applicant specifically denied use of any illegal drugs.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | AR20070006841C071029

    Original file (AR20070006841C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Jerome L. Pionk | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of pay in the amount of $335.00 per month for 2 months, restriction for 45 days and extra duty for 45 days. A review of the available records fails to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000824

    Original file (20100000824.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to a fully honorable discharge. On 28 October 1988, his intermediate commander reviewed the recommended separation action and recommended approval of the applicant's discharge with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 2 November 1988, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 14 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of misconduct -...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014236

    Original file (20090014236.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 August 1988, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge (misconduct - abuse of illegal drugs) and directed the issuance of a general discharge. However, the separation authority could direct a general discharge if such was merited by the member's overall record. ___________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 | CY2009 | 20090009286

    Original file (20090009286.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although many of the documents in the applicant's separation packet are undated, they indicate that the applicant's commander informed him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the U.S. Army under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c(2)b (commission of a serious offense - second time drug offenders), Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel) for wrongfully using cocaine on two occasions. He also understood that if he had less than 6 years of total...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005723

    Original file (20080005723.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's records are incomplete; however, there is sufficient evidence available to show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 December 1981 for a period of 3 years. On 5 October 1988, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct - commission of a serious offense with issuance of a General Under Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. Therefore, the Board determined that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007028

    Original file (20100007028.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 January 1989, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation and directed the applicant be issued an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged on 18 January 1989 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, for misconduct based on drug abuse, and his service was characterized as under other than honorable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000981C070206

    Original file (20050000981C070206.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 September 1987, the applicant's unit commander recommended that a bar to reenlistment be imposed against him for the two nonjudicial punishments under Article 15 he received on 21 May 1987 and 24 September 1987. The applicant was discharged on 12 July 1988 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(2) for misconduct – commission of a serious offense. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000981C070206

    Original file (20050000981C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 June 1988, the unit commander notified the applicant of separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12 for abuse of illegal drugs. The applicant was discharged on 12 July 1988 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12c(2) for misconduct – commission of a serious offense. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706507C070209

    Original file (9706507C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 August 1988, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation. On 31 August 1988, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive a general discharge under honorable conditions. The applicant was discharged on 8 September 1988, in the pay grade E-1, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for misconduct - abuse of illegal drugs, and was given a general discharge under honorable conditions.