RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 13 February 2007
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060012677
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
Mrs. Victoria A. Donaldson
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.
Chairperson
Mr. William F. Crain
Member
Mr. Dale E. DeBruler
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 that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge should be upgraded based on the fact that he made the honorable decision to "stand by" his wife during a difficult pregnancy. The applicant continues that as soon as "the crisis had passed" he turned himself into military authorities.
3. The applicant did not provide any additional documentary evidence in support of his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 18 March 1991, the date of his discharge. The application submitted in this case is dated 19 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's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 July 1989 for a period of three years. Records show that he completed one station unit training and that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was private first class/pay grade E-3.
4. The applicants records do not show any significant acts of valor during his military service.
5. On 9 January 1991, charges were preferred against the applicant for being absent without leave (AWOL) from on or about 2 July 1990 through on or about 4 January 1991.
6. On 10 January 1991, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the UCMJ, the possible effects of an under other than honorable conditions discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him. Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial.
7. In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated that he understood that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charge against him, or of a lesser included offense, that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He further acknowledged he understood that if his discharge request was approved, he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and that he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.
8. On 7 February 1991, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 18 March 1991, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he completed a total of 1 year, 2 months, and 12 days of creditable active military service and that he accrued 186 days of time lost due to AWOL.
9. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of limitations.
10. There is no evidence in the available records which show that the applicant consulted with pertinent military officials regarding his personal situation or that he requested a hardship discharge.
11. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) 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 trail by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.
12. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, 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 members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.
13. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends that his under other than honorable conditions discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge because he made the honorable decision to be with his wife during a difficult pregnancy.
2. The applicants record shows he was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. After consulting with defense counsel, he voluntarily requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. All requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, the applicants discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.
3. The applicant's record of service shows that he accrued 168 days of lost time due to AWOL. Additionally, his records do not indicate any significant acts of valor.
4. Based on his record of indiscipline, the applicant's service clearly does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. This misconduct also renders his service unsatisfactory. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to either a general or an honorable discharge.
5. Additionally, there is no evidence in the available records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence showing that he sought assistance through his chain of command or any other military authority for his personal problems. Additionally, there is no evidence that the applicant requested a discharge based on hardship.
6. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 18 March 1991; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 17 March 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
_DED___ __WFC___ _HOF___ 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.
_Hubert O. Fry, Jr.___
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX
RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007829
The applicant states that he entered the service at eighteen years of age, was inexperienced and developed a drinking problem while on active duty. On 20 August 1991, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was being considered for administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for a pattern of misconduct. On 20 August 1991, the applicants commander recommended separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075701C070403
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The Army regulation governing RE codes shows that RE-3B pertains to Army personnel with lost time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060006333
The applicant requests correction of his records to show that he completed 20 years of service and received a "20 Year Letter" for retirement purposes. Army Regulation 135-180 states in paragraph 2-3, that a twenty-year letter will be issued to the Reserve Component soldier within 1 year after they complete 20 years of qualifying service for retirement. In view of the detrimental reliance in this case, it would be appropriate to transfer sufficient retirement points from his retirement...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040002023C070208
The applicant requests that his record be corrected to show three awards of the Army Commendation Medal, two awards of the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal, award of the Armed Forces Reserve Medal with M device, and award of the Kuwait Liberation Medal. The applicant was awarded the second award of the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal for the four-year period ending in March 1993, after his release from active duty on 17 August 1991. The Board determined that the evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03094030C070212
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Expert Infantryman Badge and the Combat Infantryman Badge. While the evidence does show that the applicant was deployed to Southwest Asia in support of Operation Desert Shield/Storm, there is no evidence the applicant engaged in active ground combat and as such there is no basis for an award of the Combat...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004104595C070208
The applicant requests that his record be corrected to show award of the Purple Heart. Presumably, the applicant is requesting award of the Purple Heart for injuries incurred in Vietnam, and while his 27 August 1971 DD Form 214 indicates that he was a member of a medical holding detachment, this in itself is not proof that he was wounded as a result of hostile action; nor does the entry on his personnel qualification record suffice as such evidence. The evidence shows that the applicant’s...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071865C070403
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 to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. APPLICANT REQUESTS:...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001505C070208
The applicant provides: a. Copies of two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) for the active duty period 30 November 1990 to 14 May 1991; one shows a character of service as under other than honorable conditions, the other shows a character of service as under honorable conditions (general). 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077106C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his military records be corrected to show that he was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) in the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7). In the opinion of the Board, notwithstanding the TDY forms he provided, the applicant has failed to provide sufficient independent evidence to support his claim...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012326
There is insufficient evidence in the available records to show that she is entitled to a campaign badge based on her military service. Therefore, she is entitled to correction of her records to show this award. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 11 February 1991; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 10 February 1994.