RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  4 October 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070008250 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Mr. Rial D. Coleman

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Susan A. Powers

Chairperson

Mr. Edward E. Montgomery

Member

Mr. Qawiy A. Sabree

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 discharge be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states that he was advised to request an upgrade of his discharge due to the charge for his misconduct being excessive and not fitting of the crime for which he was separated.  The applicant continues that his immaturity and poor judgment were the cause of the indiscipline which resulted in his discharge.

3.  The applicant provides no documentary evidence in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s 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.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Army at the age of 21, on
6 November 1985 and served until his separation on 12 May 1992.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training.  Upon completion of advanced individual training, he was awarded the military occupational specialty 63B (Light wheel vehicle mechanic).  The highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist-four/pay grade E-4.  The applicant's record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition.

3.  The record reveals a disciplinary history that includes his acceptance of a field grade memorandum of reprimand for driving under the influence of alcohol on
2 October 1991.  The memorandum was placed permanently in the applicant's Official Military Personnel File.

4.  The applicant's Military Personnel Record Jacket contains no separation packet indicating the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's separation processing.  The record does include a separation document (DD Form 214) that shows on 12 May 1992, he was separated under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of misconduct - commission of a serious offense and that he received a general discharge under honorable conditions.

5.  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 member’s 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge based on the fact that the charge for his misconduct was excessive and not fitting of the crime for which he was separated, and that he was young and immature at the time of his military service was carefully considered and determined to be without merit.

2.  The applicant's record is void of a separation packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge processing.  However, it does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 that identifies the reason and characterization of his discharge.  Therefore, Government regularity in the discharge process is presumed.

3.  In the absence of information to the contrary, it is concluded that all requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

4.  Records show that the applicant was 27 years of age at the time of his offenses.  There is no evidence that indicates that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

5.  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.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_SAP___  __EEM__  _QAW___   DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.





___Susan A. Powers__
          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.