Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070008368
Original file (20070008368.txt) Auto-classification: Denied


RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  30 October 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070008368 


	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. Dean L. Turnbull

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Carmen Duncan

Chairperson

Mr. Chester A. Damian

Member

Mr. 

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 under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general or honorable discharge. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he does not feel that the extenuating circumstances of the processing of his discharge were considered.  He states that there were definite miscommunications of orders from his superior officers.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a written statement, dated 6 April 2007.

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 military service records show that he enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) and subsequently entered active duty for training on 27 November 1981.  He completed the necessary training and was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 35B (Electronic Instrument Repairer).  He was honorably released from active duty for training on 14 August 1982 after completing 8 months and 18 days of active service.

3.  On 25 January 1983, the applicant enlisted into the Regular Army for a period of 3 years.  He attended advanced individual training and was awarded MOS 11H (Heavy Antiarmor Weapons Infantryman).

4.  His records show that he departed absent without leave AWOL on  
12 October 1985.  He was dropped from the rolls of the Army on 10 November 1985 and returned to military control on 29 July 1986.  On 31 July 1986, the applicant made a statement as to why he went AWOL.  In his statement, he stated, in effect, that the reason he went AWOL was because he was unable to extend his 15 days of emergency leave to be with his father during his heart surgery.
5.  A DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) shows that the applicant's status was changed from ordinary leave to AWOL effective 0001 hours, on 12 October 1985.

6.  On 5 August 1986, the applicant was charged with one specification of AWOL for the period 12 October 1985 to 29 July 1986.  The applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provision of Army 
Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation), chapter 10.

7.  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.

8.  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.  He also acknowledged that he understood that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life by reason of an Under Other Than Honorable Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was advised that he may submit any statements he desires in his own behalf, which will accompany his request for discharge.  The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf.

9.  On 11 August 1986, the applicant's commander forwarded his recommendation for separation to the approving authority.  In the commander's recommendation it was stated that the applicant has no motivation for continued service and will not respond to either counseling or rehabilitation.

10.  On 22 September 1986, the approving authority approved the applicant's request and directed the applicant be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  Upon discharge the applicant was reduced to private/pay grade E-1.

11.  On 14 October 1986, the applicant was discharged.  The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he completed a total of 2 years, 11 months, and 3 days of active military service and that he accrued 289 days of time lost.


12.  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.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 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.

14.  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.

15.  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 Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general or an honorable discharge.

2.  The evidence shows the applicant was AWOL from 12 October 1985 to  
29 July 1986.  As such, an under other than honorable conditions discharge was equitable and proper.

3.  The applicant's statement that he went AWOL because he was unable to extend his 15 days of emergency leave to be with his father during his heart surgery is noted.  A DA Form 4187 shows that the applicant's status had changed from ordinary leave to AWOL effective 0001 hours, on 12 October 1985.  There is no evidence of an emergency leave request in the applicant's military service records.  As such, his statement is not sufficient to warrant a change to a properly issued discharge.
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.  The extensive length of his AWOL renders his service unsatisfactory. Therefore, he is not entitled to either an honorable or a general discharge.

5.  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.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____cd__  ____rdg__  ___cad__  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.




_________Carmen Duncan________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070008368
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20071030
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.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20080007556

    Original file (AR20080007556.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant also states that the Army said yes to his request and told him that he could upgrade his discharge to an honorable discharge after 6 months; however, this never happened. The applicant’s military service records contain a DD Form 293 (Application for Review of Discharge or Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States), received on 14 August 1986, that shows the applicant requested upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006108C070206

    Original file (20050006108C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was separated on 23 October 1987, under the provisions of paragraph 14-12b of Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of misconduct and issued a General Discharge Certificate. There is no evidence in the available records which shows that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitation.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050018215C070206

    Original file (20050018215C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since the applicant’s record of service included one nonjudicial punishment and 48 days of lost time, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge or a general discharge. It is noted that during an interview the applicant stated his reasons for going AWOL (his daughter was very sick, no...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065511C070421

    Original file (2001065511C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board notes that the applicant’s current contention that he was given an extension of leave over the phone but was charged with being AWOL anyway is different from his contention at the time that he tried to contact his unit through the services of his recruiter but was unable to do so. While the Board sympathizes with the applicant’s reasons for wanting a leave...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089189C070403

    Original file (2003089189C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of her appeal, she submits a letter from a Congressman’s office dated 14 January 1986, urging her to return herself to military control; an undated letter to her from Cutler Army Hospital, Headquarters, Fort Devens Medical Department Activity; a copy of a letter from a psychologist dated 1 November 1985; a copy of a letter prepared by the applicant dated 16 October 1992, explaining the events that took place when she was absent without leave (AWOL); a copy of a letter that she...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017292

    Original file (20080017292.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 August 1975, the applicant requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 10 (Discharge for the Good of the Service). The applicant's military personnel records contain a copy of his DD Form 214 that shows he entered active duty this period on 11 January 1974 and was discharged on 8 October 1975, with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions, in accordance with the provisions of Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014168

    Original file (20140014168.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 April 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140014168 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Item 35 of her DA Form 20 shows she was assigned to Korea from on or about 21 December 1984 to on or about 6 April 1985. On 23 August 1985, she consulted with counsel who advised her of the basis for her contemplated trial by court-martial for an offense punishable by a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge; the effects of requesting discharge under the provisions of Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012791

    Original file (20090012791.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The evidence of record shows the applicant arrived in the ROK on or about 2100 hours, 2 January 2009; he was detained by the Korean Police; he was released to the Military Police on 3 January 2009; and he reported to accountability formation on 5 January 2009. c. Records show the applicant's duty status was changed from AWOL to PDY effective 0127 hours, 3 January 2009, and that the DA Form 4187 was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072400C070403

    Original file (2002072400C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. There is no evidence in the available records 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 statute of limitations. Chapter 10 of the regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011272

    Original file (20090011272.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states that he obtained employment and adds that the 6 months he was in an AWOL status was the most stressful period of his life. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged on 21 August 1980 in accordance with the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial, and his service was characterized as under other than honorable conditions. There...