RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 17 April 2007
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060012600
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.
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 that her military records be cleansed of any reference to larceny of Government funds and false swearing.
2. The applicant states she has no memory of such a thing and never stole from the Government. She states while applying for a new teaching position a fingerprint check revealed this derogatory information.
3. The applicant provides no additional information.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 30 April 1991. The application submitted in this case is dated 28 August 2006.
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 limitations 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 applicants failure to timely file.
3. The applicant served in the Regular Army from 15 January 1988 to 30 April 1991. She served in Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 72G, Telecommunications Center Operator.
4. On 27 April 1989, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for stealing, on or about 1 April 1989, approximately $150.00 US currency, the property of the United States Government and for unlawfully making under oath a false statement. Punishment imposed included reduction from Private First Class to Private (E-2), forfeiture of $175.00 pay per month for 1 month, and 14 days of extra duty. She did not appeal her punishment.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's contention that she never stole money belonging to the US Government or made any false official statement is not persuasive. The record clearly shows that she was confronted for stealing $150.00 in US Government funds and for making under lawful oath a false statement. She accepted NJP for this offense and was punished accordingly. She did not appeal the imposed punishment.
2. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
3. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 30 April 1991; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 29 April 1994. 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
__JTM___ __TMR___ __RMN___ 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.
John T. Meixell
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR20060012600
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED
20070417
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.
134.0200
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02884
Additionally, his commanders recommended a UOTHC discharge. The applicant, while serving in the grade of sergeant, was discharged from the Air Force on 23 April 1992 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Request for Discharge in Lieu of Court-Martial) with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of discharge on 25 January 1996.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00795
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00795 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 SEP 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a under honorable conditions (general) discharge. The applicant was tried by general court martial on 12 April 1990 for: Charge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010359
He was discharged on 10 May 1991. The applicant requests a discharge upgrade to honorable. Instead he requested discharge in lieu of trial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008587
When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Although the applicant contends it did not take 1 year and 8 months after he was incarcerated to be discharged as reflected in section III of his ADRB proceedings, the evidence of record shows he was convicted by a special court-martial on 26 September 1994 and his appellate process was not completed until 24 January 1996. He was discharged on...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075573C070403
On 14 June 2001, he submitted an Article 139 claim against the NCOIC with the intent of collecting his money back. On 4 February 2002, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14 for misconduct, due to his felony conviction by civil authorities. Although the individual who stole the funds from the applicant should have been held liable for paying the applicant back, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01739
He receive a Presidential pardon removing his court-martial conviction and bad conduct discharge (BCD) from his record. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. As such, applicant's request for a Presidential pardon is not possible since such action is not within the purview of this Board's authority.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050007334C070206
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. As a result, there is insufficient basis for upgrading his discharge to a general or honorable discharge. Records indicate that the applicant was 19 years old at the time of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007110
He was issued a bad conduct discharge on 9 March 1995 under the provisions of chapter 3, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), as a result of a court-martial. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory, but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Therefore, the applicant's service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable or a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019405
He was told his discharge would be under honorable conditions because the other persons involved were the ones who did the stealing. On 23 January 1975, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for stealing personal property of another Soldier valued at $20.00. Special Court-Martial Order Number 21, Headquarters, III Corps and Fort Hood, Texas, dated 19 July 1977, provided that the sentence to a bad...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000494
On 28 April 1989, the applicant's unit commander notified him he was initiating action which could result in separation from the Army with a general discharge under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, for serious misconduct: being found guilty of larceny of government and personal property and amassing $1,800 worth of dishonored checks on his account. On 8 May 1989, the separation authority approved...